State v. ulvinen

Case Brief

1. Harold Sowards
CJ 322, Tu/Th 9:30
9/27/15
State v. Ulvinen
313 N.W. 2d 425 (Minn. 1981)
1. Facts
 Helen Ulvinen moves into the house on July 26
 Carol Hoffman lets everyone know she hates her
 Carol refuses sex from her husband David Hoffman, he chokes her and then dismembers
her
 Calls for his mother Helen to keep watch upstairs for the children
 David disposes of the body in a bag and drops it off in Weaver Lake
 David phones in a missing person report and him and his mom make up a story
 Aug. 19,1980 David confesses to the murder of Carol and includes that Helen knew all
about it
 Helen gets convicted of 1
st
degree murder pursuant to Minn. Statute 609.05 subd. 1
(1980) which imposes criminal liability on one who intentionally aids, advises, hires,
counsel or conspires with or otherwise procures another to commit a crime
 Minnesota Supreme Court reversed this decision

2. Issue
Is there evidence that Helen influenced her son’s decision to kill his wife?

3. Holdings
No, reversed

4. Reasoning
Insulated by statute (Minn. Stat. 609.495 subd.2 1980) from guilt as an accomplice after-the-fact
for such conduct because of her relation as a parent of the offender. The evidence at best
supports that Ulvinen passively acquiesced in her son’s plan to kill his wife. The state hasn’t
proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the appellant was guilty of anything but passive
approval. Minnesota statutes don’t make an omission of warning someone about their
impending death a criminal offense. If that was the case more of the people that David told
about the death would be held accountable, therefore the case must be reversed.