Dereje v. State
Annotate this CaseRespondent was charged with criminal sexual conduct in the fourth and fifth degree. Respondent agreed to conduct a trial on stipulated facts pursuant to Minn. R. Crim. P. 26.01(3) and waived all trial rights. The district court found Respondent guilty of criminal sexual conduct in the fifth degree. Respondent subsequently filed a petition for postconviction relief, contending that he was entitled to a new trial because the procedure used to convict him was not a trial on stipulated facts pursuant to Rule 26.01(3) and because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The court of appeals reversed Respondent's conviction on the grounds that Respondent's trial counsel failed to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing. The Supreme Court reversed, holding (1) it was not error for the parties to conduct a bench trial consistent with the provisions of Rule 26.01(2) even though the parties characterized the trial as a stipulated-facts trial under Rule 26.01(3); and (2) Respondent received ineffective assistance of counsel where defense counsel did not entirely fail to subject the prosecution's case to meaningful adversarial testing.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.