Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 632.01 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
[Repealed, 1979 c 233 s 42]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases, 1951–2010 · leading case: State v. Bristol, 149 N.W.2d 84 (Minn. 1967).
State v. Bristol, 149 N.W.2d 84 (Minn. 1967). “It seems to be clear that when the issue is not certified § 632.01 is applicable. Under that section removal to the supreme court may be made by appeal or writ of error.”
Madison v. Tahash, 249 F. Supp. 600 (D. Minn. 1966). “Minn.Stat.Ann. § 632.01. The time within which to seek review in the United States Supreme Court would then have lapsed ninety days after the judgment of the State court.”
Toua Hong Chang v. State, 778 N.W.2d 388 (Minn. Ct. App. 2010). “1-2 (citing Minn. Stat. §§ 632.01 , .02 (1965)). Parker mailed his notice of appeal to the attorney general and to the district court on the last day of the appeal period.”
State v. Azzone, 135 N.W.2d 488 (Minn. 1965). “§ 632.01; State v. Roggenbuck, 263 Minn. 396 , 116 N.”
State v. DeCloux, 136 N.W.2d 657 (Minn. 1965). “(2d) 32 , that an order denying a motion to vacate a judgment of conviction is not appealable and that where the time for appeal from a judgment has expired under § 632.01, it cannot be extended by repeated motions to vacate the judgment of conviction.”
City of St. Paul v. Wiplinger, 186 N.W.2d 540 (Minn. 1971). “The Parker case deals with §§ 632.01 and 632.02, providing for appeals and writs of error in removing criminal cases from district court to the supreme court.”
State ex rel. Williams v. Cnty. of Hennepin, 89 N.W.2d 907 (Minn. 1958). “The right of review in a criminal matter is governed by § 632.01, which reads as follows: *333 “Criminal cases may be removed by the defendant to the supreme court, by appeal or writ of error, at any time within six months after judgment, or after the decision of a motion…”
State v. Pruitt, 119 N.W.2d 32 (Minn. 1962). “1 The 6-month period for appeal provided by § 632.01 has long since expired. 2 It cannot be revived by repeated motions to vacate the judgment of conviction.”
State v. Alm, 111 N.W.2d 517 (Minn. 1961). “1 To permit the trial court to vacate a judgment after the statutory period has elapsed in order to revive a defendant’s right to appeal would wholly frustrate the purpose of § 632.01 and render it. meaningless. It is the fixed public policy of this state to put an end to…”
State v. Myhro, 354 N.W.2d 571 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). “See, Minn.Stat. § 632.01 (1971) (Repealed 1979 Minn.”
State v. Collins, 132 N.W.2d 802 (Minn. 1964). “corpus, in so far as based on the claim of illegal search and seizure, is without prejudice to any claims which may be made by the defendant when and if the disputed evidence is offered against him at trial and is without any attempt to forecast what the ultimate determination…”
State v. Nobles, 47 N.W.2d 473 (Minn. 1951). “The six months within which appeal could be taken from the judgment or sentence of April 7, 1926, expired on October 7 of that year.”
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.