Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State Ex Rel. Roy v. Tahash, 152 N.W.2d 301.

80 citing documents.

Bolstad v. State 435 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Bolstad v. State 435 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238, 240
Bailey v. State 414 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Bailey v. State 414 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238, 244
Berg v. State 403 N.W.2d 316 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Berg v. State 403 N.W.2d 316 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238, 243-44 , (Tahash I).
Beltowski v. State 183 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 1971
Beltowski v. State 183 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 1971
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 , 1 the postconviction court determined that no further evidentiary hearing was necessary and, after painstakingly considering all of petitioner’s claims on the merits, denied relief.
Morrissey v. State 174 N.W.2d 131 Minn. 1970
Morrissey v. State 174 N.W.2d 131 Minn. 1970
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 .
State Ex Rel. Gray v. Tahash 156 N.W.2d 228 Minn. 1968
State Ex Rel. Gray v. Tahash 156 N.W.2d 228 Minn. 1968
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 .
State v. Williams 155 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1968
State v. Williams 155 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1968
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 , defendant would be expected to support his claims by oral testimony under oath subject to cross-examination and the prosecution would be afforded an opportunity to present rebuttal testimony, upon which record the findings of the trial court may then be susceptible of appellate review.
State v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
State ex rel. Kier v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
State v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, Minn., , filed July 14, 1967.
State ex rel. Kier v. Tahash 153 N.W.2d 222 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 .
State ex rel. Riggers v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 1967
State ex rel. Riggers v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 476 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 , the petition appears to sufficiently allege some facts which, if proved, would entitle petitioner to relief, thus precluding a summary disposition.
State ex rel. Chapman v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1967
State v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 1967
State ex rel. Ingham v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 1967
State ex rel. Cable v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 1967
State ex rel. Saum v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1967
State ex rel. Cable v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 , the petition appears to sufficiently allege some facts which, if proved, would entitle petitioner to relief, thus precluding a summary disposition.
State ex rel. Ingham v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 , and State ex rel.
State ex rel. Saum v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 , and State ex rel.
State v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, Minn., , and State ex rel Cable v. Tahash, Minn., , filed herewith.
State ex rel. Chapman v. Tahash 152 N.W.2d 309 Minn. 1967
Roy v. Tahash, 277 Minn. 238 , 152 N. W. (2d) 301 , and State ex rel.