Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Sailor, 153 N.W. 271.

51 citing documents.

State v. Combs 504 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Combs 504 N.W.2d 248 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
799, 803 (1897) (state constitutional prohibition refers to punishments that are cruel or barbarous), overruled on other grounds by State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , 153 N.W.
City of St. Paul v. Willier 231 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1975
City of St. Paul v. Willier 231 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1975
State v. Dolliver, 154 Minn. 297 , State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84
State v. Keenan 184 N.W.2d 410 Minn. 1971
State v. Keenan 184 N.W.2d 410 Minn. 1971
State v. Johnson, 37 Minn. 493 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; State v. Gaularpp, 144 Minn. 86 , ; State v. O’Connor, 154 Minn. 45 , ; State v. McLeavey, 157 Minn. 408 , ; State v. Beaudette, 168 Minn. 444 , .
State v. Taylor 133 N.W.2d 828 Minn. 1965
State v. Taylor 133 N.W.2d 828 Minn. 1965
9 See, State v. Rasmussen, 241 Minn. 310 , 63 N. W. (2d) 1 ; State v. DeZeler, 230 Minn. 39 , 41 N. W. (2d) 313 , 15 A. L. R. (2d) 1137; State v. Soltau, 212 Minn. 20 , 2 N. W. (2d) 155 ; State v. Jenkins, 171 Minn 173, ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; State v. Newman, 127 Minn. 445 , .
State v. Higgin 99 N.W.2d 902 Minn. 1959
State v. Higgin 99 N.W.2d 902 Minn. 1959
See, also, State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
State v. Finley 8 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 1943
State v. Finley 8 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 1943
§ 2479(b), provides: “If the court reviews the evidence the defendant is entitled to a charge that the jury are the exclusive judges of all questions of fact, but a failure to make such a charge is not a ground for a new trial in the absence of a timely request.” See State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; State v. McCarthy, 159 Minn. 48 , ; State v. Zempel, 103 Minn. 428 , .
Ryan v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 289 N.W. 557 Minn. 1939
Ryan v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co. 289 N.W. 557 Minn. 1939
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
State v. Rivers 287 N.W. 790 Minn. 1939
State v. Rivers 287 N.W. 790 Minn. 1939
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
State v. Stevens 238 N.W. 673 Minn. 1931
State v. Stevens 238 N.W. 673 Minn. 1931
*292 State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; State v. McCarthy, 159 Minn. 48 , ; State v. Shansy, 164 Minn. 10 , ; State v. Eidsvold, 172 Minn. 208 , .
Klaman v. Hitchcock 231 N.W. 716 Minn. 1930
Klaman v. Hitchcock 231 N.W. 716 Minn. 1930
Gasser v. Wall, 115 Minn. 59 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; Smith v. G. N. Ry.
State v. Eidsvold 215 N.W. 206 Minn. 1927
State v. Eidsvold 215 N.W. 206 Minn. 1927
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; State v. McCarthy, 159 Minn. 48 , .
State v. Jenkins 213 N.W. 923 Minn. 1927
State v. Jenkins 213 N.W. 923 Minn. 1927
State v. Johnson, 37 Minn. 493 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; State v. Gaularpp, 144 Minn. 86 , ; State v. Brinkman, 145 Minn. 18 , ; State v. Abdo, 149 Minn. 195 , ; State v. O'Connor, 154 Minn. 45 , ; State v. McLeavey, 157 Minn. 408 , .
State v. Shansy 204 N.W. 467 Minn. 1925
State v. Shansy 204 N.W. 467 Minn. 1925
State v. McCarthy, 159 Minn. 48 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
State v. McCarthy 197 N.W. 961 Minn. 1924
State v. McCarthy 197 N.W. 961 Minn. 1924
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; State v. Rutledge, 142 Minn. 117 , .
State v. Dolliver 191 N.W. 594 Minn. 1923
State v. Dolliver 191 N.W. 594 Minn. 1923
State v. Pennington, 149 Minn. 109 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
Rennie v. Skellett Co. 186 N.W. 130 Minn. 1921
Rennie v. Skellett Co. 186 N.W. 130 Minn. 1921
Co. 36 Minn. 22 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; Outcelt v. Chicago B. & Q. Ry.
Outcelt v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad 185 N.W. 495 Minn. 1921
Outcelt v. Chicago, Burlington & Quincy Railroad 185 N.W. 495 Minn. 1921
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , ; Clapp v. Minneapolis & St.
State v. Townley 182 N.W. 773 Minn. 1921
State v. Townley 182 N.W. 773 Minn. 1921
State v. Zempel, 103 Minn. 428 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
State v. Hines 182 N.W. 450 Minn. 1921
State v. Hines 182 N.W. 450 Minn. 1921
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
State v. Dallas 176 N.W. 491 Minn. 1920
State v. Dallas 176 N.W. 491 Minn. 1920
77 Minn. 245 , ; Goodhue F. W. Co. v. Davis, 81 Minn. 210 , ; State v. Hoy, 83 Minn. 286 , ; State v. Yates, 99 Minn. 461 , ; Taubert v. Taubert, 103 Minn. 247 , ; Kincaid v. Jungkunz, 109 Minn. 400 , ; State v. Almos, 122 Minn. 479 , ; Gran v. Gran, 129 Minn. 531 , ; State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
State v. Gaularpp 174 N.W. 445 Minn. 1919
State v. Gaularpp 174 N.W. 445 Minn. 1919
The rule is very fully considered in State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , , and State v. Johnson, 37 Minn. 493 , , therein cited, is directly in point upon the omission to charge upon a lesser degree of crime than the one named in the indictment.
State v. Rutledge 171 N.W. 275 Minn. 1919
State v. Rutledge 171 N.W. 275 Minn. 1919
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , , and cases cited.
State v. Shtemme 158 N.W. 48 Minn. 1916
State v. Shtemme 158 N.W. 48 Minn. 1916
As to the one referring to defendant’s testimony, it was distinctly disapproved in State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , , but was there held insufficient, standing alone, to warrant a new trial.
Likum v. Porter 154 N.W. 1070 Minn. 1915
Likum v. Porter 154 N.W. 1070 Minn. 1915
State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , .
Smith v. Great Northern Railway Co. 155 N.W. 1040 Minn. 1915
Smith v. Great Northern Railway Co. 155 N.W. 1040 Minn. 1915
Had the defendant supposed such definition would be of any benefit to him, he ought to have requested it to give such definition, and, not having done so, there was no ground for the exception.” In the case of State v. Sailor, 130 Minn. 84 , , it was held that “the defendant in a criminal prosecution, whether the issue of fact be one of intent or other fact, is entitled to a charge upon the presumption of innocence, overruling State v. Borgstrom, 69 Minn. 508 .