Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State Ex Rel. Rasmussen v. Tahash, 141 N.W.2d 3.
-
State v. Beard
288 N.W.2d 717
Minn. 1980
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539
- State v. Grey 256 N.W.2d 74 Minn. 1977
-
State v. Grey
256 N.W.2d 74
Minn. 1977
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 554 , where we outlined constitutionally required pretrial procedures: “If the defendant elects to contest the admissibility of the evidence under Federal constitutional grounds, a pretrial fact hearing on the admissibility of the evidence will be held in open court with the defendant present
- State v. Weekes 250 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 1977
-
State v. Weekes
250 N.W.2d 590
Minn. 1977
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539
- State v. Turner 239 N.W.2d 468 Minn. 1976
-
State v. Turner
239 N.W.2d 468
Minn. 1976
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539
- State v. Walker 235 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 1975
-
State v. Walker
235 N.W.2d 810
Minn. 1975
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , makes it clear that admission of evidence of a prejudicial nature does not entitle a defendant to a new trial as a matter of right where *118 proper objection was not made at the trial level.
- State v. Van Alstine 232 N.W.2d 899 Minn. 1975
-
State v. Van Alstine
232 N.W.2d 899
Minn. 1975
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539
- State v. Davis 233 N.W.2d 561 Minn. 1975
-
State v. Davis
233 N.W.2d 561
Minn. 1975
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 554 , State v. LaFrance, 302 Minn. 245 , State v. Hall, 286 Minn. 424, 429 , State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29 , State v. Kinn, 288 Minn. 31, 34
- State v. Grilli 230 N.W.2d 445 Minn. 1975
-
State v. Grilli
230 N.W.2d 445
Minn. 1975
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539
- State v. Trueman 227 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1975
-
State v. Trueman
227 N.W.2d 824
Minn. 1975
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 551
- State v. Riley 226 N.W.2d 907 Minn. 1975
-
State v. Riley
226 N.W.2d 907
Minn. 1975
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , operated as a bar to the admission of this evidence.
- State v. Kluck 217 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 1974
-
State v. Kluck
217 N.W.2d 202
Minn. 1974
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 553 , we outlined the procedures for notice and pretrial hearing to be followed when evidence obtained through *169 search and seizure or confessions will be introduced by the state at trial.
- State v. Sharich 209 N.W.2d 907 Minn. 1973
-
State v. Sharich
209 N.W.2d 907
Minn. 1973
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , and that if such a hearing had been held, the statements would have been held inadmissible under Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L. ed. 2d 694 (1966).
- Houghton v. State 207 N.W.2d 63 Minn. 1973
-
Houghton v. State
207 N.W.2d 63
Minn. 1973
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 551 , we observed that new trials in criminal cases will be granted more readily where claims of constitutional infringement are promptly called to the attention of reviewing courts “so that a second trial, if ordered, can be had before memories fade or witnesses disappear.” Here, almost 50
- State v. Wiley 205 N.W.2d 667 Minn. 1973
-
State v. Wiley
205 N.W.2d 667
Minn. 1973
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , and had not undertaken to show that the admission was made voluntarily, Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U. S. 436 , 86 S. Ct. 1602 , 16 L. ed. 2d 694 (1966).
- Van Straaten v. State 204 N.W.2d 420 Minn. 1973
-
Van Straaten v. State
204 N.W.2d 420
Minn. 1973
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539
- State v. Bell 199 N.W.2d 769 Minn. 1972
-
State v. Bell
199 N.W.2d 769
Minn. 1972
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , 141 N. W. (2d) 3 .
- State v. Gabler 199 N.W.2d 439 Minn. 1972
-
State v. Gabler
199 N.W.2d 439
Minn. 1972
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539
- State v. Ritchie 195 N.W.2d 570 Minn. 1972
-
State v. Ritchie
195 N.W.2d 570
Minn. 1972
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , the court correctly denied the motions to suppress based on a claimed invalid arrest.
- State v. Hoskins 193 N.W.2d 802 Minn. 1972
-
State v. Hoskins
193 N.W.2d 802
Minn. 1972
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , this statement and one defendant had given subsequently were held admissible.
- State v. Colonga 188 N.W.2d 925 Minn. 1971
-
State v. Colonga
188 N.W.2d 925
Minn. 1971
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , 141 N. W. (2d) 3 , this court established a procedure whereby at the time of arraignment, or as soon thereafter as possible, the state must inform the court whether its case includes evidence which was obtained as the result of a search and seizure, evidence which was discovered because of a confession or statements
- State v. Bergland 187 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1971
-
State v. Bergland
187 N.W.2d 622
Minn. 1971
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , 141 N. W. (2d) 3 , that it intended to offer the footprint evidence resulted in prejudice so great that the trial court should have granted a mistrial.
- State v. Alexander 185 N.W.2d 887 Minn. 1971
-
State v. Alexander
185 N.W.2d 887
Minn. 1971
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539, 556 , 141 N. W. (2d) 3, 14 , that we encourage pretrial consideration of evidentiary problems, the resolution of which “is needed to assure the integrity of the trial when conducted,” we made it clear when a pretrial evidentiary hearing is required to determine the admissibility of the state’s evidence: “The procedur
- Black v. State 184 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1971
-
Black v. State
184 N.W.2d 419
Minn. 1971
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , 141 N. W. (2d) 3 .
- State v. Walter 184 N.W.2d 426 Minn. 1971
-
State v. Walter
184 N.W.2d 426
Minn. 1971
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , 141 N. W. (2d) 3 ; that admission of evidence with respect to prior felony and misdemeanor convictions was error; that error was committed by the court in failing to strike answers given when objections to the questions had been sustained; that he was denied a speedy trial; and that he was denied his right to effect
- State v. Bishop 183 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 1971
-
State v. Bishop
183 N.W.2d 536
Minn. 1971
Rasmussen v. Tahash, 272 Minn. 539 , 141 N. W. (2d) 3 .
- Simberg v. State 179 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 1970