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. Johnson, 152 N.W.2d 529.

63 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    First, in arguing for a “grave doubts” standard for reversal, Sledge cites four cases that use that phrase— specifically, —but he does not explain how those cases compare to his circumstances or how they support reversal of his convictions despite the presence of sufficient evidence.
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    “It is a general rule that the legal excuse of self-defense is available only to those who act honestly and in good faith.” State v. Johnson
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
    “It is a general rule that the legal excuse of self-defense is available only to those who act honestly and in good faith.”
  • State of Minnesota, Minn. 2024
    Almost a century later, the Legislature passed section 609.06, 5
  • Minn. 2023
    As the court of appeals recognized, , we have interpreted Minn. Stat. § 609.06, subd.
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    The supreme court has granted new trials w here it “entertains grave doubt as to a defendant’s guilt” and the “interests of justice require that there be a new trial.”
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
  • In the Matter of: Naomi Rae Marx, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
    which discusses self-defense to a murder charge, not defense of property.
  • State v. Edwards 717 N.W.2d 405 Minn. 2006
  • State v. Vazquez 644 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Carothers 594 N.W.2d 897 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Carothers 594 N.W.2d 897 Minn. 1999
    While we reaffirmed the duty to retreat before using deadly force in self-defense outside the home in State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373 , Minnesota’s jury instruction guide continued to recommend that trial courts instruct juries regarding the duty to retreat as follows: “A person who has been attacked and who is exercising his right of self-defense is not required to retreat and he not only may stand his ground and de
  • State v. Carothers 585 N.W.2d 64 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • State v. Carothers 585 N.W.2d 64 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
    Boyce, 284 Minn. at 253 , d at 112 (citing State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373 , ).
  • State v. Basting 572 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Basting 572 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 1997
    (citing State v. Johnson, 277 *286 Minn. 368, 373, ); Minn.Stat.
  • State v. Thompson 544 N.W.2d 8 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Thompson 544 N.W.2d 8 Minn. 1996
    State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368
  • State v. Andrasko 454 N.W.2d 648 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Andrasko 454 N.W.2d 648 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
    Before a person may invoke the doctrine of self-defense, however, he has a duty “to retreat or avoid the danger if reasonably possible.” State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373
  • State v. Hennum 428 N.W.2d 859 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Hennum 428 N.W.2d 859 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373
  • State v. McKissic 415 N.W.2d 341 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. McKissic 415 N.W.2d 341 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    See State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373
  • Johanson v. State 404 N.W.2d 362 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Johanson v. State 404 N.W.2d 362 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373
  • State v. McGath 352 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. McGath 352 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    Finally, in State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368 , a homicide case, the court noted that the excuse of self-defense requires the absence of aggression or provocation by the person claiming the excuse.
  • State v. Austin 332 N.W.2d 21 Minn. 1983
  • State v. Austin 332 N.W.2d 21 Minn. 1983
    State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373
  • State v. Spaulding 296 N.W.2d 870 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Spaulding 296 N.W.2d 870 Minn. 1980
    State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373
  • State v. Morgan 296 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Morgan 296 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1980
    State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373
  • In Re the Welfare of S. W. T. 277 N.W.2d 507 Minn. 1979
  • In Re the Welfare of S. W. T. 277 N.W.2d 507 Minn. 1979
    State v. Swanson, 307 Minn. 412 , State v. Spann, 289 Minn. 497 , State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368
  • State v. Myers 276 N.W.2d 36 Minn. 1979
  • State v. Myers 276 N.W.2d 36 Minn. 1979
    See, State v. Boyce, 284 Minn. 242 , and State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368
  • State v. Taylor 258 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Taylor 258 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 1977
    In State v. Boyce, 284 Minn. 242, 253 , citing State v. Johnson, 211 Minn. 368, 373, the elements of self-defense were enumerated as follows: “ ‘It is a general rule that the legal excuse of self-defense is available only to those who act honestly and in good faith.
  • State v. Columbus 258 N.W.2d 122 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Columbus 258 N.W.2d 122 Minn. 1977
    These factors are set out in State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 373 , : “It is a general rule that the legal excuse of self-defense is available only to those who act honestly and in good faith.
  • State v. Dakota 217 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1974
  • State v. Dakota 217 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1974
    The rule stated in the instruction in question was explicitly approved in State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368 , a homicide case, and again approved in State v. Baker, 280 Minn. 518 , a case involving assault.
  • State v. Howard 217 N.W.2d 196 Minn. 1974
  • State v. Howard 217 N.W.2d 196 Minn. 1974
    See, State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368
  • State v. Kallestad 206 N.W.2d 557 Minn. 1973
  • State v. Kallestad 206 N.W.2d 557 Minn. 1973
    State v. Johnson, 277 Minn. 368, 375
  • State v. Granroth 200 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1972