Laserfiche WebLink
06/17/20~3 14:54 LR~I OFFICE 2140 4TH RUE -~ 42?5543 N0.574 [~1~2 <br />Steve~ M. Thul, Appellant, vs, State of Minnesota, Respondent. C9-02-1)65, Cm~ of Appeals Published... Page 1 of 9 <br /> <br /> STATE OF MINNESOTA <br /> IN COURT OIr APPEALS <br /> C9.02-1365 <br /> <br />Steven M. Thu], <br />Appellant, <br /> <br />State of Minnesota, <br />P,.¢spond.eat. <br /> <br />Filed March 11, 2003 <br />Affirmed <br /> Kalitowski, Judge <br /> <br />Anoka County District Court <br />File No. TX0021308 <br /> <br />Steven J. Meshbesher, Meshbesher & Associates, P.A., 225 Lumber Exchange Building, 10 South Fifth <br />SWeet, Minneapolis, MN 55402 (for appellant) <br /> <br />Mike Haoh, Attorney General, 525 Park Street, Suite 500, St. Paul, MN 55103; and <br /> <br />Wilbur F. Dom, Ham Lake City Attorney, Dom Law Firm, Ltd., 9380 Central Avenue Northeast, Suite 200, <br />Blaine, MN 55434 (for respondent) <br /> <br />Considered and decided by Kalitowski, Presiding Judge, Hudson, Judge, and Poritsky, Judge.- <br /> SYLLABUS <br /> <br /> 1. City <br /> <br />aircraft in certain <br />Amendment. <br /> <br /> 2. <br /> <br />of Ham Lake, Minn., City' Code § 9-470 (2000), restricting the Operation of regulated <br />residential areas, does not violate the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth <br /> <br />City of Ham La.kc, Minn., City Code § 9-470 (2000) does not violate the Due Process Clause of <br /> <br />the Fourteenth Amendment as being constitutionally void due to vagueness. <br /> <br /> 3. City of Ham Lake, Minn., City Code § 9-470 (2000) is not preempted by fcdcraI law. <br /> OPINION <br /> <br />KALtTOWSKI, Judge <br /> <br /> Appellant Steven M. Thul challenges the denial of Iris petition for postconviction relief for violating <br />City of Ham Lake, Minn., City Code § 9-470 (2000). The postconviction court determined that the ordinance <br /> <br />http://~m~w.lawlibrary.state.mn.us/ar¢tfive/ctappublO303/op021365-311 .htm 6/10/03 <br /> <br /> <br />