Preview:

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A09-1744 State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Henry Hyunchoon Pak, Appellant. Filed August 24, 2010 Affirmed Schellhas, Judge Ramsey County District Court File No. 62SU-CR-09-3818 Lori Swanson, Attorney General, St. Paul, Minnesota; and Jerome P. Filla, Jessica A. Johnson, Peterson, Fram & Bergman, St. Paul, Minnesota (for respondent) William J. Mauzy, Piper Kenney Webb, Casey T. Rundquist, The Law Offices of William J. Mauzy, Minneapolis, Minnesota (for appellant) Considered and decided by Connolly, Presiding Judge; Stoneburner, Judge; and Schellhas, Judge. SYLLABUS 1. A district court abuses its discretion when it excludes defense character evidence

that is admissible under Minn. R. Evid. 404(a)(1). 2. It is not plain error for a district court to allow a responding officer to testify that

he formed a conclusion at the scene that an alleged victim had been assaulted.

OPINION SCHELLHAS, Judge Appellant challenges his assault and emergency-call-interference convictions, arguing that he was prejudiced at trial by evidentiary errors. The district court abused its discretion by excluding appellant`s proffered character evidence, but we conclude that the error was harmless. We reject the balance of appellant`s claims of error and therefore affirm. FACTS Following an altercation between appellant Henry H. Pak and his wife H.E.P., respondent State of Minnesota charged appellant with: (I) interference with an

emergency call in violation of Minn. Stat.

Download A09-1744, State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Henry Hyunchoon Pak, Appellant..pd

Minnesota Law