Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Mathiasen, 127 N.W.2d 534.

73 citing documents.

State v. Comparetto 193 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 1971
9 See, also, State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , State v. Sorg, 275 Minn. 1
State v. Reed 192 N.W.2d 183 Minn. 1971
State v. Reed 192 N.W.2d 183 Minn. 1971
634.04; State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , State v. Smith, 264 Minn. 307
State v. Mastrian 171 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 1969
State v. Mastrian 171 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 1969
As summarized in State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 , the kinds of evidence which may supply needed corroboration include defendant’s possession of instruments used in the commission of the crime; suspicious, unusual, or unexplained conduct of the defendant before or after the crime; testimony of incriminating admissions made by defendant of partic
State Ex Rel. Thunstrom v. Tahash 167 N.W.2d 139 Minn. 1969
State Ex Rel. Thunstrom v. Tahash 167 N.W.2d 139 Minn. 1969
Ogg v. Tahash, 273 Minn. 187 , 140 N. W. (2d) 692 ; State v. Marinasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 .
State v. Searles 165 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1969
State v. Searles 165 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1969
634.04 was considered by this court at some length in State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 .
State v. Bellecourt 152 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1967
Distinguished State v. Bellecourt 152 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1967
The verdict, having the approval of the trial court, should not be disturbed.” *165 We distinguish State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 , relied on by defendant.
State v. Jackson 147 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1967
State v. Jackson 147 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 1967
With respect to the validity of evidence showing association at the time a crime was committed with one who admittedly took part in the crime, or was proved to have done so, as circumstantial proof that defendant was a participant in the crime, see State v. Biehoffer, 269 Minn. 35 , 129 N. W. (2d) 918 ; State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 .
State v. Sorg 144 N.W.2d 783 Minn. 1966
State v. Sorg 144 N.W.2d 783 Minn. 1966
State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 .
State v. Housker 139 N.W.2d 474 Minn. 1966
State v. Housker 139 N.W.2d 474 Minn. 1966
*46 State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 .
State v. Azzone 135 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1965
State v. Azzone 135 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1965
Compare with respect to § 634.04, State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 .
State v. Biehoffer 129 N.W.2d 918 Minn. 1964
State v. Biehoffer 129 N.W.2d 918 Minn. 1964
See, State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 ; State v. Lupino, 268 Minn. 344 , 129 N. W. (2d) 294 .
State v. Lupino 129 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 1964
State v. Lupino 129 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 1964
In State v. Mathiasen, 267 Minn. 393 , 127 N. W. (2d) 534 , the Minnesota decisions pertaining to the statutory requirements of corroboration were reviewed and it was pointed out that the corroborating evidence, to be sufficient, must affirm the truth of the accomplice’s testimony and point to the guilt of the defendant in some substantial degree.