Minnesota Lawyer
Appellant disputed the District Court’s denial of his request for a trial continuance that would have permitted his further efforts to arrange for services of counsel. He also asserted error in the court’s jury instruction on a charge of violating an order for protection (OFP). The Court of Appeals held that appellant waived counsel by his conduct and appellant’s rights were not substantially affected by the court’s erroneous instruction. Affirmed.
A13-0361 State v. Anderson (Carver County)
