Essay, 2 pages (350 words)

Minnesota v. riff

Advertising We'll write a high-quality original custom paper on Minnesota v. riff just for you with a 15% discount for the 1st order Use a Discount Use a Discount

The defendant was arrested the day after by Officer Schield at 3. 30 p. m. on the ground that he broken into, entered, and burglarized Marquette’s Market.
Defense’s Opening Statement
The Defense’s case is that the defendant, Ronald Riff, won over $900. 00 in a poker game between 8. 30 p. m. and 12. 00 a. m. of the night of the alleged burglary. There are witnesses to prove that the Riff won a great deal of money, including the Canadian five-dollar bill found in Riff’s person. The riff borrowed a tan cloth money bag from Red’s Pleasure Palace to put his winnings into. He took the hammer from Rusty Fender’s to protect himself and his money. He never stopped by Marquette’s Market, but he did toss away the hammer at the point as he ran home. The riff had no motive to steal from Marquette’s Market as he had won enough to pay off his debts to Vibes and buy a new guitar.
Prosecution’s Closing Statement
The prosecution has proved that the defendant, Ronald Riff, is guilty of stealing $910 from Marquette’s Market after breaking into the store. There is no doubt about Riff’s involvement in the crime. The prosecution witnesses have proved beyond doubt that the Riff did not win the money at Red’s Pleasure Palace. The defense has failed to provide reasonable doubt that the money has been stolen and not won at the gambling establishment. Most of the money was won by Melvin Strongarm and this amounts to no more than $280. The riff must be held guilty and awarded due punishment for the crime.
Defense’s Closing Statement
The defense has proved that the defendant is not guilty of stealing the said amount from Marquette’s Market, and the said amount that the Riff won became known to Speedy Marquette and Marquette has staged the burglary to spite the Riff. The prosecution has failed to prove beyond doubt that the money was indeed stolen from Marquette’s Market. There were five persons besides the Riff playing at Red’s Pleasure Palace. So it is not impossible for the Riff to have won $900 from them. The defense pleads that the defendant is set free forthwith.

Thanks for your opinion!
Minnesota v. riff. Page 1
Minnesota v. riff. Page 2
Minnesota v. riff. Page 3

Your fellow student wrote and submitted this work, "Minnesota v. riff". This sample can be used for research and reference in order to help you write your own paper. It is prohibited to utilize any part of the work without a valid citation.

If you own this paper and don't want it to be published on EduFrogs.com, you can ask for it to be taken down.

Ask for Removal

Cite this Essay


EduFrogs. (2022) 'Minnesota v. riff'. 6 September.


EduFrogs. (2022, September 6). Minnesota v. riff. Retrieved from https://edufrogs.com/minnesota-v-riff/


EduFrogs. 2022. "Minnesota v. riff." September 6, 2022. https://edufrogs.com/minnesota-v-riff/.

1. EduFrogs. "Minnesota v. riff." September 6, 2022. https://edufrogs.com/minnesota-v-riff/.


EduFrogs. "Minnesota v. riff." September 6, 2022. https://edufrogs.com/minnesota-v-riff/.

Work Cited

"Minnesota v. riff." EduFrogs, 6 Sept. 2022, edufrogs.com/minnesota-v-riff/.

Get in Touch with Us

If you have ideas on how to improve Minnesota v. riff, feel free to contact our team. Use the following email to reach to us: [email protected]