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. Ellis, 136 N.W.2d 384.

28 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota v. Bryant Terrell Garth, II Minn. Ct. App. 2025
  • State of Minnesota v. Bryant Terrell Garth, II Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    Similarly, the Minnesota Supreme Court has recognized that sequestering witnesses affords “opposing counsel the opportunity of bringing out in cross-examination any discrepancies in the testimony of the various witnesses.” (emphasis added).
  • State v. Zornes 831 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2013
  • State v. Zornes 831 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2013
    We have echoed the logic behind excluding witnesses by saying that “[t]he basic reason for sequestration of witnesses, of course, is to remove any possibility that a witness waiting to testify may be influenced.” State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345, 364
  • State v. Miller 396 N.W.2d 903 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Miller 396 N.W.2d 903 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    The basic purpose for sequestration of witnesses is to remove any possibility that a witness waiting to testify may be influenced consciously or subconsciously by the testimony of other witnesses and “to afford opposing counsel the opportunity of bringing out in cross-examination any discrepancies in the testimony of the various witnesses.” State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345, 364
  • Bangert v. State 282 N.W.2d 540 Minn. 1979
  • Bangert v. State 282 N.W.2d 540 Minn. 1979
    State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345
  • State v. Swain 269 N.W.2d 707 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Swain 269 N.W.2d 707 Minn. 1978
    See, State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345 , (7 month interval); State v. Hogan, 297 Minn. 430 , (3 month interval).
  • State v. Taylor 258 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Taylor 258 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 1977
    State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345 , Fenton v. Minneapolis Street Ry.
  • State v. Nelson 257 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Nelson 257 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1977
    State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345
  • State v. Morgan 246 N.W.2d 165 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Morgan 246 N.W.2d 165 Minn. 1976
    State v. Annis, 291 Minn. 552 , State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345 , State v. Lupino, 268 Minn. 344 , certiorari denied, 379 U. S. 978 , 85 S. Ct. 681 , 13 L. ed. 2d 569 (1965).
  • State v. Hogan 212 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 1973
  • State v. Hogan 212 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 1973
    E.g., State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345
  • State v. Annis 192 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Annis 192 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1971
    The trial court has broad discretion in deciding whether or not to grant a change of venue, State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345
  • State v. Mastrian 171 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 1969
  • State v. Mastrian 171 N.W.2d 695 Minn. 1969
    See, State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345 , 136 N. W. (2d) 384 .
  • State v. Collins 150 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1967
  • State v. Collins 150 N.W.2d 850 Minn. 1967
    We think that defendant’s contentions concerning the prosecutor’s final argument are amply answered in the recent decision of this court in State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345, 368 , 136 N. W. (2d) 384, 398 , and in State v. Guevara, 270 Minn. 356, 360 , 133 N. W. (2d) 492, 495 .
  • State v. Dhaemers 150 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1967
  • State v. Dhaemers 150 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1967
    1 See, State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345 , 136 N. W. (2d) 384 .
  • State v. Keiser 143 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 1966
  • State v. Keiser 143 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 1966
    The procedure heretofore followed by this court as expressed in State v. Schabert, 218 Minn. 1 , 15 N. W. (2d) 585 ; State v. Nelson, 199 Minn. 86 , ; State v. Ellis, 271 Minn. 345 , 136 N. W. (2d) 384 , must be revised because it presents a hazard “that a jury permitted to decide both voluntariness and credibility will fail to reject a confession obtained by improper means when persuaded of the truth of it.” State ex rel.