# State v. Nelson

> Supreme Court of Minnesota · February 12, 2014 · 842 N.W.2d 433

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8247172

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE of Minnesota v. Larry Allen NELSON
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Minnesota
- **Decided:** February 12, 2014
- **Citations:** 842 N.W.2d 433; 2014 Minn. LEXIS 59; 2014 WL 551642
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Gildea
- **Judges:** Dietzen, Gildea, Lillehaug, Stras
- **Cited by:** 58 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8247172

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that the rule of lenity “applies to the interpretation of criminal statutes when ‘a grievous ambiguity or uncertainty in the statute’ remains after we have considered other canons of statutory construction” (quoting Dean v. United States, 556 U.S. 568, 577, 129 S.Ct. 1…
- stating that the rule of lenity applies “when ‘a grievous ambiguity or uncertainty in the statute’ remains after we have considered other canons of statutory construction” (quoting Dean v. United States, 556 U.S. 568, 577, 129 S.Ct. 1849, 173 L.Ed.2d 785 (2009))
- concluding that when a criminal statute was ambiguous and none of the alternative reasonable interpretations was most persuasive, under the rule of lenity, the statute would be construed in favor of the defendant
- stating “the basic principle that the relevant definition of a term depends on the context in which the term is used”
- stating that the rule of lenity only applies when there is “a grievous ambiguity or uncertainty in the statute”

## Opinion text

GILDEA, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
I join the dissent of Justice Lillehaug.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/8247172. Public record. Not legal advice.