# State of Minnesota v. Clarence Bruce Beaulieu

> Supreme Court of Minnesota · February 4, 2015 · 859 N.W.2d 275

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9805944

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. Clarence Bruce BEAULIEU, Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of Minnesota
- **Decided:** February 4, 2015
- **Citations:** 859 N.W.2d 275; 2015 Minn. LEXIS 43; 2015 WL 446702
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Dissent by Wright
- **Judges:** Dietzen, Lillehaug, Wright
- **Cited by:** 52 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/9805944

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- stating that the Osborne forfeiture exception applies when “an intervening change in the law excuse[s] the defendant’s failure to assert what would have otherwise been a futile objection in the district court.”
- noting that “waiver is the intentional relinquishment . . . of a known right” and forfeiture is a “failure to make a timely assertion of a right” (quotation omitted)
- clarifying that forfeiture doctrine applies when defendant failed to object or raise issue in district court, but plain-error doctrine permits an appellate court to consider forfeited errors
- stating that plain-error review “requires a defendant to establish” its three conditions

## Opinion text

WRIGHT, Justice
(dissenting).
I join in the dissent of Justice Lillehaug.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9805944. Public record. Not legal advice.