Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Monroe, 172 N.W. 313.

74 citing documents.

State v. Hacker 191 N.W. 37 Minn. 1922
State v. Hacker 191 N.W. 37 Minn. 1922
The testimony was admissible for several reasons: It comes within the principle of such cases as State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , , holding that testimony of other offenses is admissible where it tends to show a general scheme, or plan, or system, as to defraud, and is therefore corroborative of the evidence of complainant.
State v. Jatal 188 N.W. 284 Minn. 1922
State v. Jatal 188 N.W. 284 Minn. 1922
State v. Munroe, 142 Minn. 394 , .
State v. Friend 186 N.W. 241 Minn. 1922
State v. Friend 186 N.W. 241 Minn. 1922
There are exceptions, such as those stated in State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , , and State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , .
Albrecht v. Rathai 185 N.W. 259 Minn. 1921
Albrecht v. Rathai 185 N.W. 259 Minn. 1921
State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Friedman, 146 Minn. 373 , , .
State v. Pugliese 182 N.W. 958 Minn. 1921
State v. Pugliese 182 N.W. 958 Minn. 1921
State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Lyons, 144 Minn. 348 , ; State v. Fitchette, 88 Minn. 145 , ; 8 R. C. L. 197.
State v. Morris 182 N.W. 721 Minn. 1921
State v. Morris 182 N.W. 721 Minn. 1921
State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , .
State v. Nelson 181 N.W. 850 Minn. 1921
State v. Nelson 181 N.W. 850 Minn. 1921
The exceptions are stated in State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , , and State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , , which go quite far.
In re Mason 181 N.W. 570 Minn. 1920
In re Mason 181 N.W. 570 Minn. 1920
State v. Wilson, 72 Minn. 522 , ; State v. Ames, 90 Minn. 183 , ; State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Whipple, 143 Minn. 403 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , .
State v. Friedman 178 N.W. 895 Minn. 1920
State v. Friedman 178 N.W. 895 Minn. 1920
State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Whipple, 143 Minn. 403 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , .
State v. Couplin 178 N.W. 486 Minn. 1920
State v. Couplin 178 N.W. 486 Minn. 1920
State v. Miller, 45 Minn. 521 , ; State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , .
State v. Ettenberg 176 N.W. 171 Minn. 1920
State v. Ettenberg 176 N.W. 171 Minn. 1920
State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; Chapman v. State, 112 Ga.
State v. Whipple 173 N.W. 801 Minn. 1919
State v. Whipple 173 N.W. 801 Minn. 1919
Evidence of this character is admissible, if it is part of one plan or scheme carried on by defendant to wilfully violate the law, State v. Ames, 90 Minn. 183 , ; State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , , or if it tends to show an inclination or predisposition to commit the offense charged.