This opinion will be unpublished and

may not be cited except as provided by

Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (1996).

STATE OF MINNESOTA

IN COURT OF APPEALS

C3-96-1710

State of Minnesota,

Respondent,

vs.

Jon Pinkerton Koemptgen,

Appellant.

Filed March 25, 1997

Affirmed

Harten, Judge

St. Louis County District Court

File No. T5-96-607714

Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Attorney General, 14th Floor NCL Tower, 445 Minnesota Street, St. Paul, MN 55101 (for Respondent)

William P. Dinan, Duluth City Attorney, M. Alison Lutterman, Assistant City Attorney, 410 City Hall, Duluth, MN 55802 (for Respondent)

Fred T. Friedman, Sixth Judicial District Chief Public Defender, Camille V. Doran, Assistant Public Defender, 920 Alworth Building, 306 West Superior Street, Duluth, MN 55802 (for Appellant)

Considered and decided by Amundson, Presiding Judge, Short, Judge, and Harten, Judge.

U N P U B L I S H E D O P I N I O N

HARTEN, Judge

Appellant Jon Koemptgen challenges his petty misdemeanor conviction for giving a false name and birth date to police, arguing that (1) the request for identification was unlawful, and (2) there is insufficient evidence to support his conviction. We affirm.

FACTS

Shortly before midnight on May 14, 1996, a Duluth police officer stopped a speeding vehicle occupied by several individuals including Koemptgen, who was a rear-seat passenger. During the stop, an officer asked the passengers for identification. Koemptgen did not produce a picture ID, but identified himself as Kim Jong Ill, gave April 22, 1975, as his birth date, and stated that he had a Minnesota driver's license. After verifying the spelling and spacing of the name, the officer attempted to confirm the information using his squad car computer.

Unable to confirm the name and birth date, the officer questioned Koemptgen further and twice asked him if he used any other names. After providing a second name that the officer could not verify, eventually Koemptgen provided the name Jon Koemptgen, with no middle name and the same birth date. Likewise unable to confirm this information, the officer radioed the desk officer who found the name Jon Pinkerton Koemptgen with an April 22, 1976, birth date. Confronted with this information, Koemptgen admitted that his middle name was Pinkerton.

At trial, Koemptgen testified that when the officers stopped the car, he knew his legal name was Jon Pinkerton Koemptgen. The district court found Koemptgen guilty of giving a false name and birth date, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.506 (1996).

D E C I S I O N

Koemptgen argues for the first time on appeal that the officer unlawfully questioned him and asked for his identification. Generally, we will not consider an issue unless it has been raised before, and decided by, the district court. See State v. Sorenson, 441 N.W.2d 455, 459 (Minn. 1989) (appellate courts "most reluctant" to address issues that have not been raised before district court); State v. Hanley, 363 N.W.2d 735, 740 (Minn. 1985) (where defendant failed to raise constitutional issue at trial, he waived his right to appellate review of the issue). In the instant case, the application of this general rule is strengthened by the lack of an adequate record to allow meaningful review of the relevant facts and circumstances bearing on the legality of the identification request. See State v. Pfannenstein, 525 N.W.2d 587, 588-89 (Minn. App. 1994) (request for identification constitutes seizure only if, considering totality of circumstances, reasonable person would have believed that he or she was not free to leave or otherwise decline request), review denied (Minn. Mar. 14, 1995). Accordingly, we decline consideration of this issue.

Koemptgen also argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. When reviewing a sufficiency of the evidence claim, we apply the same standard of review regardless of whether a case is tried to a jury or to a judge without a jury. State v. Cox, 278 N.W.2d 62, 65 (Minn. 1979). We will uphold the district court's findings if, given the evidence in the record, the defendant could reasonably be found guilty of the charged offense. Id. On appeal, we view the evidence in a light most favorable to the state and assume that the district court disbelieved any evidence to the contrary. Id.

Here, the record indicates that Koemptgen knew that his legal name was Jon Pinkerton Koemptgen when the officer requested this information. Nonetheless, Koemptgen withheld the information. After the officer twice asked him if was known by any other names, Koemptgen still did not give his full legal name and the officer had to independently confirm his identity. Koemptgen testified:

I was simply giving the name that I go by and I was simply not giving the officer any further information until he asked for it.

The evidence demonstrates that Koemptgen knowingly failed to give the officer complete and accurate information. Therefore, we conclude that the evidence supports the conviction.

Affirmed.