Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 617.02 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

[Repealed, 1967 c 507 s 12]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases, 1943–2018 · leading case: State v. Holloway, 916 N.W.2d 338 (Minn. 2018).
State v. Holloway, 916 N.W.2d 338 (Minn. 2018). · cites it 2× “2 (1974) ; Minn. Stat. § 617.02 (1965); Minn. Stat. § 617.”
State v. Bonynge, 450 N.W.2d 331 (Minn. Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 617.02 (1965). Carnal knowledge with a child was incorporated into the criminal sexual conduct statutes.”
State v. Reichenberger, 182 N.W.2d 692 (Minn. 1970). “1965, § 617.02. Appellant entered a plea of not guilty to the offense charged in the information.”
State v. Linehan, 150 N.W.2d 203 (Minn. 1967). “” 3 Under § 617.02, the offense is to “carnally know and abuse any female child under the age of 18 years.”
State v. Schwartz, 10 N.W.2d 370 (Minn. 1943). “Prior to that time the crime was defined simply as “the crime against nature.”
State v. Siebke, 12 N.W.2d 186 (Minn. 1943). “1941, § 617.02 (Mason St. 1927, § 10125), provides: “Every person who shall carnally know and abuse any female child under the age of 18 years shall be punished.”
State v. Artez, 176 N.W.2d 81 (Minn. 1970). “1965, § 617.02. 1 The issues raised by defendant are (1) the sufficiency of the evidence to support a conviction, and (2) the propriety of receiving into evidence testimony concerning a laboratory test.”
State v. Tellock, 118 N.W.2d 347 (Minn. 1962). “The defendant has not sustained his burden of overcoming the presumption that the judgment was valid, nor did the court abuse its discretion in ruling on the petition without a hearing.”
State Ex Rel. Beach v. Tahash, 161 N.W.2d 664 (Minn. 1968). “1965, § 617.02. He pleaded guilty to both crimes and was sentenced to a term of 10 years for the larceny and 7 years for the carnal knowledge, the sentences to be served consecutively.”
State v. King, 167 N.W.2d 745 (Minn. 1969). “1965, § 617.02. That same afternoon he was brought before a justice of the peace and bound over to district court.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.