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. Borst, 154 N.W.2d 888.

66 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota v. Kristi Dannette Mcneilly 6 N.W.3d 161 Minn. 2024
  • State of Minnesota v. Kristi Dannette Mcneilly 6 N.W.3d 161 Minn. 2024
    n.17 (Minn. 1980) (requiring a preliminary probable cause hearing); (requiring an attorney for a criminal defendant charged with a misdemeanor); (requiring an attorney for indigent defendants in paternity adjudications “where the complainant is represented by the county attorney”); Scales, d at 592 (requirin
  • Jason Maurice Fagin, Minn. 2019
    (adopting a new rule that all custodial interrogations be recorded); (adopting a new rule that indigent defendants, including those charged with misdemeanors, are entitled to appointed counsel at trial if they face incarceration).
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
    State v. Borst , 278 Minn. 388, 397
  • State of Minnesota v. Dylan Micheal Kelley 855 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 2014
  • State of Minnesota v. Dylan Micheal Kelley 855 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 2014
    -02 (Minn.2006) (shifting the burden of proving the impact of prosecutorial misconduct from the defendant to the State); State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , -95 (1967) (extending right to court-appointed counsel to persons charged with misdemeanor offenses).
  • Chambers v. State 831 N.W.2d 311 Minn. 2013
  • State v. Randolph 800 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 2011
  • State v. Randolph 800 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 2011
    See State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397, 399-400 , cf. Morris, d at 85 .
  • State v. Obeta 796 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2011
  • In Re the Welfare of J.B. 782 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2010
  • In Re the Welfare of J.B. 782 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2010
    § 524.5-304(b) (2008) (guardianship matters); -04 (Minn.1984) (civil contempt proceedings); State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , (invoking inherent power of court to provide counsel in misdemeanor cases).
  • Morris v. State 765 N.W.2d 78 Minn. 2009
  • Morris v. State 765 N.W.2d 78 Minn. 2009
    See State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 396-97 , (holding, based on our supervisory power over the administration of justice, that indigent defendants, including those charged with misdemeanors, were entitled to appointed counsel at trial if they faced incarceration for their crimes).
  • State v. Schmidt 712 N.W.2d 530 Minn. 2006
  • State v. Schmidt 712 N.W.2d 530 Minn. 2006
    But, the Friedrich court observed that Minnesota law does afford the right to counsel at a plea hearing on a misdemeanor charge which may lead to incarceration, citing State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388
  • State v. Cunningham 663 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Cunningham 663 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , (extending right to misdemeanors in which jail sentence may be imposed).
  • State v. Costello 646 N.W.2d 204 Minn. 2002
  • State v. Costello 646 N.W.2d 204 Minn. 2002
    792 , 9 L.Ed.2d 799 (1963); see also, e.g., State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , (exercising supervisory power to require the appointment of counsel to represent indigent misdemeanor defendants).
  • State v. Dumas 587 N.W.2d 299 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • State v. Dumas 587 N.W.2d 299 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • State v. Gilmartin 535 N.W.2d 650 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • State v. Gilmartin 535 N.W.2d 650 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 402 , (Peterson, J., concurring).
  • State v. Scales 518 N.W.2d 587 Minn. 1994
  • State v. Scales 518 N.W.2d 587 Minn. 1994
    See State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397
  • State v. Lefthand 488 N.W.2d 799 Minn. 1992
  • State v. Lefthand 488 N.W.2d 799 Minn. 1992
    State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , State v. Collins, 278 Minn. 437, 437 , State v. Illingworth, 278 Minn. 434, 435
  • State v. Fussy 467 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 1991
  • State v. Fussy 467 N.W.2d 601 Minn. 1991
    4 Our concern, expressed in State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , and in Nordstrom , “that an accused person may wind up in jail without the assistance of counsel, to present what defense he may have remains unchanged” to this date.
  • State v. Friedrich 436 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • State v. Friedrich 436 N.W.2d 475 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
    [T]his court, in the exercise of its supervisory power to insure the fair administration of justice, decided ‘that counsel should be provided in any case, whether it be a misdemeanor or not, which may lead to incarceration in a penal institution.’ [State v.] Borst [, 278 Minn. 388 ], [(1967)].
  • Mongan v. Pima County Superior Court 715 P.2d 739 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Edmison 379 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Edmison 379 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1985
    Specifically, in Minnesota “counsel should be provided in any case * * which may lead to incarceration in a penal institution.” State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397
  • State v. Nordstrom 331 N.W.2d 901 Minn. 1983
  • Matter of Peters 332 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1983
  • Matter of Peters 332 N.W.2d 10 Minn. 1983
    at 345 n. 5 (quoting State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , ), that in a paternity action where the complainant is represented by the county attorney, counsel must be provided to an indigent defendant.
  • State v. Nordstrom 331 N.W.2d 901 Minn. 1983
    Five years before Argersinger was decided, this court, in the exercise of its supervisory power to insure the fair administration of justice, decided “that counsel should be provided in any case, whether it be a misdemeanor or not, which may lead to incarceration in a penal institution.” State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , (emphasis added).
  • State v. Caldwell 322 N.W.2d 574 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Caldwell 322 N.W.2d 574 Minn. 1982
    See State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397
  • Hepfel v. Bashaw 279 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 1979
  • Hepfel v. Bashaw 279 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 1979
    In State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397 , 5 years before the Supreme Court’s holding in Argersinger , this court held that “(i]n the exercise of our supervisory power to insure the fair administration of justice,” counsel should be provided in any case that could result in incarceration in a penal institution.
  • City of Minneapolis v. Wentworth 269 N.W.2d 882 Minn. 1978
  • City of Minneapolis v. Wentworth 269 N.W.2d 882 Minn. 1978
    See our opinion in State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388, 397-98 , reserving the question.
  • City of St. Paul v. DiBucci 229 N.W.2d 507 Minn. 1975
  • City of St. Paul v. DiBucci 229 N.W.2d 507 Minn. 1975
    In State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388 , and State v. Illingworth, 278 Minn. 434 , this court held that an indigent defendant was entitled to the assistance of counsel, without *510 regard to whether he was charged with an ordinance violation or a violation of a statute.
  • City of St. Paul v. Whidby 203 N.W.2d 823 Minn. 1972
  • City of St. Paul v. Whidby 203 N.W.2d 823 Minn. 1972
    *139 In State v. Borst, 278 Minn. 388 , this court held that, in a trial of a charge defined as a misdemeanor where the court may impose a sentence involving incarceration in a penal institution or jail, a defendant unable to afford private counsel is entitled to have counsel appointed to represent him.
  • Wertheimer v. State 201 N.W.2d 383 Minn. 1972