DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Sweeney, 231 N.W. 225.

91 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota v. Diamond Lee Jamal Griffin 887 N.W.2d 257 Minn. 2016
  • State v. Brown 815 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2012
  • State v. Nunn 561 N.W.2d 902 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Nunn 561 N.W.2d 902 Minn. 1997
    Wofford , 262 Minn, at 117, d at 271 (citing State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Cichon 458 N.W.2d 730 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • Seelye v. State 429 N.W.2d 669 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • Seelye v. State 429 N.W.2d 669 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    404(b); State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Alexander 398 N.W.2d 24 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Alexander 398 N.W.2d 24 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Starnes 396 N.W.2d 676 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Starnes 396 N.W.2d 676 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Doughman 384 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1986
  • State v. Doughman 384 N.W.2d 450 Minn. 1986
    State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Doughman 368 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Doughman 368 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    (Minn.1980) quoting State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Richardson 363 N.W.2d 793 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Richardson 363 N.W.2d 793 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    quoting State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Hagen 361 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Hagen 361 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    (Minn.1980) quoting State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Farr 357 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Farr 357 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Clark 296 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Clark 296 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1980
    In State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Underwood 281 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1979
  • State v. Underwood 281 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1979
    Therefore, if the testimony was admissible it would have to go to proving motive, opportunity, etc. State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Forsman 260 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Forsman 260 N.W.2d 160 Minn. 1977
    The general rule in a criminal case is that “evidence which in any manner shows or tends to show that the accused has committed another crime independent of that for which he is on trial is inadmissible.” State v. Dinneen, 300 Minn. 354, 356 , State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Johnson 256 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Johnson 256 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1977
    State v. Saucedo, 294 Minn. 289 , State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Titworth 255 N.W.2d 241 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Titworth 255 N.W.2d 241 Minn. 1977
    E. g., State v. Dinneen, 300 Minn. 354 , State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , 231 N.W.
  • State v. Morgan 246 N.W.2d 165 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Morgan 246 N.W.2d 165 Minn. 1976
    In State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , this court stated: “The general rule in a criminal case is that evidence which in any manner shows or tends to show that the accused has committed another crime independent of that for which he is on trial is inadmissible.
  • State v. Diamond 241 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Diamond 241 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1976
    See, State v. Rediker, *449 214 Minn. 470 , State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455
  • State v. Van Alstine 232 N.W.2d 899 Minn. 1975
  • State v. Van Alstine 232 N.W.2d 899 Minn. 1975
    State v. Zabrocki, 194 Minn. 346 , State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , State v. Hunter, 131 Minn. 252 , State v. Palmer, 79 Minn. 428 , State v. Thaden, 43 Minn. 253 , Adler v. Apt, 30 Minn. 45
  • State v. Dinneen 220 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1974
  • State v. Dinneen 220 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1974
    In State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , , 73 A. L. R. 380, 385 (1930), we said: “The general rule in a criminal case is that evidence which in any manner shows or tends to show that the accused has committed another crime independent of that for which he is on trial is inadmissible.
  • State v. Richmond 214 N.W.2d 694 Minn. 1974
  • State v. Richmond 214 N.W.2d 694 Minn. 1974
    See, e. g., State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450
  • State v. Saucedo 200 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Saucedo 200 N.W.2d 37 Minn. 1972
    In State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , we stated the general rule and elaborated, as exceptions to it, those instances where the probative value of the evidence of other crimes was sufficient to outweigh the danger of obtaining a conviction based on evidence of character rather than guilt.
  • State v. Martin 197 N.W.2d 219 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Martin 197 N.W.2d 219 Minn. 1972
    The general rule is expressed in State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450, 455 , as follows: “The general rule in a criminal case is that evidence which in any manner shows or tends to show that the accused has committed another crime independent of that for which he is on trial is inadmissible.
  • State v. Jensen 184 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Jensen 184 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1971
    7 Wigmore, Evidence (3 ed.) § 2060; State v. Durnam, 73 Minn. 150 , ; State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , ; State v. Mastrian, 285 Minn. 51 , 171 N. W. (2d) 695 , certiorari denied, 397 U. S. 1049 , 90 S. Ct. 1381 , 25 L. ed. (2d) 662, among others.
  • State v. Madison 160 N.W.2d 680 Minn. 1968
  • State v. Madison 160 N.W.2d 680 Minn. 1968
    State v. Sweeney, 180 Minn. 450 , .
  • State v. Johnson 152 N.W.2d 768 Minn. 1967