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. Carlson, 192 N.W.2d 421.

25 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
    The supreme court rejected Bakken’s reliance on State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368, 369-70, 381, 429 (1971), which held that possession of 29 obscene films, all discovered by police at the same time, could support only one sentence for possession of obscene material with intent to sell.
  • State of Minnesota v. Timothy John Bakken 883 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 2016
  • Distinguished State of Minnesota v. Timothy John Bakken 883 N.W.2d 264 Minn. 2016
    291 Minn. 368, 369-70, 381, 429 (1971).
  • State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
    See State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368, 380-81 , (holding that the multiple sentences of defendants based on 29 counts of possession of obscene materials in a retail store with intent to sell were a single behavioral incident); (holding ■that possession of marijuana and cocaine
  • State v. Stempf 627 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Stempf 627 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
    (West 1987); accord State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368, 376
  • State v. Davidson 481 N.W.2d 51 Minn. 1992
  • State v. Davidson 481 N.W.2d 51 Minn. 1992
    at 2755; Welke, 298 Minn. at 410 , d at 647 ; and State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368
  • State v. Zimmerman 352 N.W.2d 452 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Zimmerman 352 N.W.2d 452 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    We find persuasive by comparison the decision in State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368 , where sentencing was permitted on only one of twenty-nine convictions for possession of obscene materials at a single time and place.
  • State v. Wybierala 235 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 1975
  • State v. Wybierala 235 N.W.2d 197 Minn. 1975
    Stangvik v. Tahash, 281 Minn. 353 , State v. Fleck, 281 Minn. 247 , State v. Shevchuck, 282 Minn. 182 , State v. Boucher, 286 Minn. 475 , State v. Kooiman, 289 Minn. 439 , State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368 , State v. Finn, 295 Minn. 520 , State v. Wheat, 296 Minn. 97
  • State v. Welke 216 N.W.2d 641 Minn. 1974
  • State v. Welke 216 N.W.2d 641 Minn. 1974
    That case added, as a third element, that to prove obscenity it must be es *406 tablished the material is “utterly without redeeming social value.” This added element was thereafter effectively read into our state statute in State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368
  • State v. Hoelscher 202 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1972
  • City of Rochester v. Carlson 202 N.W.2d 632 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Carlson 202 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1972
  • City of Rochester v. Carlson 202 N.W.2d 632 Minn. 1972
    In addition to those set forth in the appendix to the dissent in State v. Hoyt, 286 Minn. 92, 113 , and State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368, 382, note 1 , (1971), there may be added Burgin v. South Carolina, 404 U. S. 806 , 92 S. Ct. 46 , 30 L. ed. 2d 39 (1971); Wiener v. California, 404 U. S. 988 , 92 S. Ct. 534 , 30 L. ed. 2d 539 (1971); and Hartstein v. Missouri, 404 U. S. 988 , 92 S. Ct. 531 , 30 L. ed. 2d 53
  • City of Rochester v. Carlson 202 N.W.2d 632 Minn. 1972
    In addition to those set forth in the appendix to the dissent in State v. Hoyt, 286 Minn. 92, 113 , and State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 386, 382, note 1 , (1971), there may be added Burgin v. South Carolina, 404 U.S. 806 , 92 S.Ct.
  • State v. Carlson 202 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1972
    Our court recognized and adopted this test of obscenity in State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368
  • State v. Hoelscher 202 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 1972
    oth case the supreme court formulated a test to be applied in determining whether material is obscene ( 354 U. S. 489 , 77 S. Ct. 1311 , 1 L. ed. 2d 1509): “* * * [W] hether to the average person, applying contemporary community standards, the dominant theme of the material taken as a whole appeals to prurient interest.” Our court recognized and adopted this test of obscenity in State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368
  • State v. Getman 195 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Getman 195 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 1972
    The proceedings in the municipal court and this appeal amount to a rerun of the issues and decision involved in State v. Carlson, 291 Minn. 368 , involving the same named defendants.