State v. Reinke

Apr 27, 1973
43315
Reporters:
, ,
Before:
Per Curiam
Per Curiam.

Defendant appeals from a conviction for aggravated forgery in violation of Minn. St. 609.625, ‍​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌‍subds. 1(1) and 3. He seeks to withdraw his guilty plea because there is no affirmative showing in the record that he understood the meaning of § 609.05, which ‍​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌‍deals with the criminal *502 liability of one who intentionally aids another in the commission of a crime. This contention is without merit. It is presumed that counsel adequately informed ‍​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌‍his client of the nature and elements of the offense, including the meaning of Minn. St. 609.05. State v. Dickson, 294 Minn. 459, 199 N. W. 2d 423 (1972); State v. ‍​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌‍Hopkins, 293 Minn. 522, 198 N. W. 2d 542 (1972); State v. Feather, 288 Minn. 556, 181 N. W. 2d 478 (1970). In any case, we are not persuaded that a failure to spell ‍​​‌‌​​​‌‌‌​​​​‌​‌​​‌‌‌‌‌‌‌​​​‌‌​​​​​​‌​​‌‌​‌‌​​​​‌​​​​‌‌‌​‌‌​‌‌​​‌‌​‌​‌‌​​​‌‌‌‌​‌‌​​​‌‌​‌​​‌​​‌‌‍out the effect of the statute was a factor in defendant’s decision to plead guilty.

Affirmed.