DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Richter, 133 N.W.2d 537.

15 citing documents.

  • Campos v. State 816 N.W.2d 480 Minn. 2012
    447 n. 8 (Minn.2006) (declining to “speculate” how the United States Supreme Court would decide the question of whether Blakely errors were structural errors); State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307, 310 , (declining to speculate on the question of whether Mapp v. Ohio should be applied retroactively and deferring resolution of the question to the Supreme Court).
  • State v. Martin 595 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    However, in State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , when determining whether to retroactively apply Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U.S. 643 , 81 S.Ct.
  • State Ex Rel. Parks v. Tahash 170 N.W.2d 448 Minn. 1969
    8 Minn. 361, 366 , 154 N. W. (2d) 691, 695 , set down the following rule: “* * * In order for the confession to invalidate the conviction, two factors must be present: (1) Defendant was misled as to his constitutional rights with regard to the illegally obtained confession; and (2) defendant’s plea of guilty must have been prompted by the existence of the confession.” See, also, State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 ; Chapman v. State, 282 Minn. 13 , 162 N. W. (2d) 698 .
  • Swanson v. State 169 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 1969
    The district court in that order cited State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 , certiorari denied, 382 U. S. 860 , 86 S. Ct. 119 , 15 L. ed. (2d) 98, and State ex rel.
  • Chapman v. State 162 N.W.2d 698 Minn. 1968
    See, e. g., State v. Poelakker, sup ra; State v. Hemstock, 276 Minn. 457 , 150 N. W. (2d) 562 ; State v. Peters, supra; State v. Ingram, supra; State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 , certiorari denied, 382 U. S. 860 , 86 S. Ct. 119 , 15 L. ed. (2d) 98.
  • State v. LaJeunesse 159 N.W.2d 261 Minn. 1968
    If they were inadmissible, defendant contends that under State v. Clifford, 267 Minn. 554 , 126 N. W. (2d) 258 , and State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 , certiorari denied, 382 U. S. 860 , 86 S. Ct. 119 , 15 L. ed. (2d) 98, he was entitled to have his plea of guilty withdrawn.
  • State v. Adkison 155 N.W.2d 394 Minn. 1967
    State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 , certiorari denied, 382 U. S. 860 , 86 S. Ct. 119 , 15 L. ed. (2d) 98; State v. Clifford, 267 Minn. 554 , 126 N. W. (2d) 258 .
  • State Ex Rel. Drysdale v. Tahash 154 N.W.2d 691 Minn. 1967
    fession, we said: “* * * If he is able to establish prima facie that he did in fact enter a plea of guilty because of a genume misapprehension of Ms legal position and his constitutional rights, the [motion to vacate the judgment and withdraw his plea of guilty] will no doubt be granted * * The Clifford case has been explamed by this court in a number of subsequent cases, e. g., State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307, 310 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537, 539 , certiorari denied, 382 U. S. 860 , 86 S. Ct. 119 , 15
  • State v. Kotka 152 N.W.2d 445 Minn. 1967
    See, One 1961 Lincoln Continental Sedan v. United States (8 Cir.) 360 F. (2d) 467; Robinson v. United States (8 Cir.) 327 F. (2d) 618; State v. Taylor, 270 Minn. 333 , 133 N. W. (2d) 828 ; State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 , certiorari denied, 382 U. S. 860 , 86 S. Ct. 119 , 15 L. ed. (2d) 98.
  • State v. Linehan 150 N.W.2d 203 Minn. 1967
    Anderson v. Tahash, supra; State v. Kramer, 272 Minn. 454 , 139 N. W. (2d) 374 ; State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 573 .
  • State v. Poelakker 148 N.W.2d 372 Minn. 1967
    Compare, State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 , certiorari denied, 382 U. S. 860 , 86 S. Ct. 119 , 15 L. ed. (2d) 98 (guilty plea based upon genuine misapprehension state could use illegally seized evidence).
  • State Ex Rel. Fruhrman v. Tahash 146 N.W.2d 174 Minn. 1966
    Compare, State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537 (guilty plea based upon genuine misapprehension state could use evidence procured by illegal search), and State v. Kramer, 272 Minn. 454 , 139 N. W. (2d) 374 (guilty plea not based on inadmissible confession).
  • State v. Clifford 141 N.W.2d 124 Minn. 1966
    1 Fahy v. Connecticut, 375 U. S. 85, 90 , 84 S. Ct. 229, 232 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 171, 175; State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307, 309 , 133 N. W. (2d) 537, 538 .
  • State Ex Rel. Rasmussen v. Tahash 141 N.W.2d 3 Minn. 1965
    Our court decided in State v. Richter, 270 Minn. 307 , 133 N. W. (2d) *545 537, that Mapp v. Ohio, 367 U. S. 643 , 81 S. Ct. 1684 , 6 L. ed. (2d) 1081, 84 A. L. R. (2d) 933, which bars use of illegally seized evidence in state criminal proceedings upon Federal constitutional grounds, should be applied prospectively only.
  • State v. Richter 133 N.W.2d 537 Minn. 1965