Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Ettenberg, 176 N.W. 171.

36 citing documents.

State v. Sandefur 82 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 1957
State v. Sandefur 82 N.W.2d 623 Minn. 1957
The actions described can scarcely be held to constitute attempted bribery which this court held to be evidence of guilt in State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , .
State v. DePauw 74 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1955
State v. DePauw 74 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 1955
See, State v. Schueller, 120 Minn. 26, 29 , ; State v. Shtemme, 133 Minn. 184, 186 , ; State v. Haney, 219 Minn. 518 , 18 N. W. (2d) 315 ; State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394, 398 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39, 43 , ; State v. Yurkiewicz, 212 Minn. 208, 210, 211 , 3 N. W. (2d) 775, 776 ; State v. Hacker, 153 Minn. 538 , ; State v. Friedman, 146 Minn. 373 , , rehearing denied, 146 Minn. 380 , .
State v. Haney 18 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1945
State v. Haney 18 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 1945
xception, evidence of a separate and independent crime is admissible if such crime is definitely the outgrowth of a plan or a system of similar crimes and such “evidence is admissible, not to establish the other crime, but as confirmatory of the evidence tending to show the commission by defendant of the one on trial.” State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394, 398 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Yurkiewicz, 212 Minn. 208 , 3 N. W. (2d) 775 ; 20 Am.
State v. Elsberg 295 N.W. 913 Minn. 1941
State v. Elsberg 295 N.W. 913 Minn. 1941
State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , .
Krenik v. Westerman 275 N.W. 849 Minn. 1937
State v. Sweeney 231 N.W. 225 Minn. 1930
State v. Sweeney 231 N.W. 225 Minn. 1930
State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Whipple, 143 Minn. 403 , ; State v. Friedman, 146 Minn. 373 , , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Friend, 151 Minn. 138 , ; State v. Hacker, 153 Minn. 538 , ; State v. Clark, 155 Minn. 117 , ; State v. Upson, 162 Minn. 9 , ; State v. Eames, 163 Minn. 249 , ; State v. Sabatini, 171 Minn. 137 , ; State, v. K
State v. Johnson 217 N.W. 683 Minn. 1928
State v. Johnson 217 N.W. 683 Minn. 1928
State v. Peterson, 98 Minn. 210 , ; State v. Gesell, 137 Minn. 43 , ; State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Clark, 155 Minn. 117 , ; State v. Upson, 162 Minn. 9 , ; State v. McGraw, 163 Minn. 154 , ; State v. Lipman, 163 Minn. 431 , 204 N. W, 163; State v. Huber, 171 Minn. 429 , .
State v. Kiewel 217 N.W. 598 Minn. 1928
State v. Kiewel 217 N.W. 598 Minn. 1928
State v. Wilson, 72 Minn. 522 , ; State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Friedman, 146 Minn. 373 , ; Albrecht v. Rathai, 150 Minn. 256 , ; State v. Hacker, 153 Minn. 538 , ; State v. Rosenberg, 155 Minn. 37 , ; State v. Horr, 163 Minn. 141, 148 , ; State v. Sabatini, 171 Minn. 137
State v. Golden 217 N.W. 489 Minn. 1928
State v. Golden 217 N.W. 489 Minn. 1928
State v. Etten-berg, 145 Minn. 39 , State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; 2 Dunnell, Minn. Dig.
State v. Sabatini 213 N.W. 552 Minn. 1927
State v. Sabatini 213 N.W. 552 Minn. 1927
All the claims in question were for labor and material furnished within a period of about six weeks for the reconstruction of defendant’s building; and we think the evidence was clearly admissible for the purpose for which it was offered under the doctrine of such cases as State v. Ames, 90 Minn. 183 , ; State v. Monroe, 142 Minn. 394 , ; State v. Etten-berg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Hacker, 153 Minn. 538 , ; State v. Rosenberg, 155 Minn. 37 , ; State v. Clark, 155 Minn. 117 , ; State v. Horr,
State v. Korsch 210 N.W. 10 Minn. 1926
State v. Korsch 210 N.W. 10 Minn. 1926
State v. Lawlor, 28 Minn. 216 , ; State v. Clements, 82 Minn. 434 , ; State v. Briggs, 122 Minn. 493 , ; State v. Christianson, 131 Minn. 276 , ; State v. Price, 135 Minn. 159 , ; State v. Dunn, 140 Minn. 308 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Huebsch, 146 Minn. 34 , .
State v. Anderson 192 N.W. 934 Minn. 1923
State v. Anderson 192 N.W. 934 Minn. 1923
State v. Evans, 88 Minn. 262 , ; State v. Ames, 90 Minn. 183 , ; State v. Dunn, 140 Minn. 308 , ; State v. Ettenberg, 145 Minn. 39 , ; State v. Townley, 149 Minn. 5 , , 17 A. L. R. 253.
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 , , .
In re the Removal of Mohn 184 N.W. 14 Minn. 1921
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 , .