Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Meany, 115 N.W.2d 247.

46 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Nicholas James Firkus Minn. 2026
Explained State of Minnesota v. Nicholas James Firkus Minn. 2026
in which we explained that an “inference” is a permissible deduction that can be drawn from the proven or admitted facts.
In the Matter of the Welfare of: J. R. Z. R., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2024
6 “In the context of careless driving, carelessness is synonymous with ordinary negligence.” ( and construing Minn. Stat. § 169.13, subd.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(In 8 chronological order) State v. Bolsinger, 221 Minn. 154, 159, State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 496, Kissner, d at 321; Hegstrom, d at 702 -03; Al-Naseer, d at 752.
State v. Engle 743 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 2008
State v. Engle 743 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 2008
§§ 169.11,169.13 *595 (2006) (current statutes dealing with criminal negligence and reckless driving); State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 495-96 , (“The crime of criminal negligence is defined in Minn. St.
State v. Engle 731 N.W.2d 852 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Engle 731 N.W.2d 852 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 496
State v. Al-Naseer 690 N.W.2d 744 Minn. 2005
State v. Al-Naseer 690 N.W.2d 744 Minn. 2005
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 505
State v. Chambers 589 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1999
State v. Chambers 589 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1999
Gross negligence has been defined as “without even scant care but not with such reckless disregard of probable consequences as is equivalent to a willful and intentional wrong.” *479 State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 496 , , 262 (1962).
State v. McAdory 543 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. McAdory 543 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
In addition, appellant’s flight from the police at the time of arrest shows a “consciousness of guilt.” (quoting State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 502 , ), review denied (Minn. Jan.
State v. Bias 419 N.W.2d 480 Minn. 1988
State v. Bias 419 N.W.2d 480 Minn. 1988
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 502
State v. Knaak 396 N.W.2d 684 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Knaak 396 N.W.2d 684 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 506
In Re the Welfare of M.B.W. 364 N.W.2d 491 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
In Re the Welfare of M.B.W. 364 N.W.2d 491 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
The court ruled the same way in State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491
State v. Givens 356 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Givens 356 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Flight evidence is admissible on the issue of “consciousness of guilt.” State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 502
State v. Carignan 271 N.W.2d 442 Minn. 1978
State v. Carignan 271 N.W.2d 442 Minn. 1978
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , State v. DePauw, 243 Minn. 375 , State v. Gensmer, 235 Minn. 72
State v. Tereau 229 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1975
State v. Tereau 229 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1975
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , ; State v. Hayes, 244 Minn. 296
State v. Hansen 206 N.W.2d 352 Minn. 1973
State v. Hansen 206 N.W.2d 352 Minn. 1973
In State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 496 , grossly negligent operation of a vehicle is defined as conduct evincing “very great negligence or without even scant care but not with such reckless disregard of probable consequences as is equivalent to a willful and intentional wrong.” 1 See, also, State v. Bolsinger, 221 Minn. 1
State v. Reichenberger 182 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 1970
State v. Reichenberger 182 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 1970
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 502 , 115 N. W. (2d) 247, 255 .
In Re Welfare of Hitzemann 161 N.W.2d 542 Minn. 1968
In Re Welfare of Hitzemann 161 N.W.2d 542 Minn. 1968
This court in State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491, 498 , 115 N.W.
State v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
State ex rel. Kier v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
State v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
On the contrary, in light of the proof required to convict of the crime of criminal negligence, see, State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , ; State v. Homme, 226 Minn. 83 , ; State v. Bolsinger, supra, the record indicates that extensive consultation with and advice to relator should have preceded the arraignment.
State ex rel. Kier v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
On the contrary, in light of the proof required to convict of the crime of criminal negligence, see State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , 115 N. W. (2d) 247 ; State v. Homme, 226 Minn. 83 , 32 N. W. (2d) 151 ; State v. Bolsinger, supra, the record indicates that extensive consultation with and advice to relator should have preceded the arraignment.
Wilder v. WT Grant Company 132 N.W.2d 852 Minn. 1965
Wilder v. WT Grant Company 132 N.W.2d 852 Minn. 1965
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , 115 N. W. (2d) 247 ; State v. Jones, 266 Minn. 526 , 124 N. W. (2d) 729 ; 21 Wd.
Johnson v. Lorraine Park Apts. Inc. 128 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 1964
Johnson v. Lorraine Park Apts. Inc. 128 N.W.2d 758 Minn. 1964
We pointed out in State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , 115 N. W. (2d) 247 , that facts may be established by circumstantial evidence but where there is no evidence, direct or circumstantial, to support an inference any conclusion based thereon becomes merely a conjecture.
State v. Zecher 128 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1964
State v. Zecher 128 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1964
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , 115 N. W. (2d) 247 ; State v. Gulbrandsen, 238 Minn. 508 , 57 N. W. (2d) 419 .
State v. Jones 124 N.W.2d 729 Minn. 1963
State v. Jones 124 N.W.2d 729 Minn. 1963
State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , 115 N. W. (2d) 247 .
State v. Wurdemann 120 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 1963
State v. Wurdemann 120 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 1963
While it is true that the particular facts alleged in the description or charge of the indictment control, State v. Farrington, 59 Minn. 147 , , 28 L. R. A. 395; State v. Meany, 262 Minn. 491 , 115 N. W.. (2d) 247, and that the discription in the charge here clearly indicates a gross misdemeanor was committed, i. e., a violation of Minn. St.