DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Wajda, 206 N.W.2d 1.

28 citing documents.

  • State v. Hall 764 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Hall 764 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 2009
    See State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29, 31 , (holding that if the district court admits a defendant’s statement, the district court “must permit the jury to hear evidence on the circumstances surrounding the making of the confession ...
  • Bixler v. State 568 N.W.2d 880 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
  • Bixler v. State 568 N.W.2d 880 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
    [I]f the trial court admits the confession, the trial court “must permit the jury to hear evidence on the circumstances surrounding the making of the confession * * * for a determination of weight and credibility * * (quoting State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29, 31 , ).
  • In Re the Welfare of M.E.P. 523 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • In Re the Welfare of M.E.P. 523 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29
  • State v. Pilcher 472 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1991
  • State v. Pilcher 472 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1991
    State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29, 31-32 , -3 (1973).
  • State v. Schaeffer 457 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1990
  • State v. Schaeffer 457 N.W.2d 194 Minn. 1990
    State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29, 31
  • State v. Andrews 388 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1986
  • State v. Andrews 388 N.W.2d 723 Minn. 1986
    State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29, 31-32 , -3 (1973).
  • State v. Maletich 384 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Maletich 384 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    619 , 30 L.Ed.2d 618 (1972); State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29, 32
  • State v. Jensen 349 N.W.2d 317 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Jensen 349 N.W.2d 317 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29, 32
  • State v. Hoffman 328 N.W.2d 709 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Hoffman 328 N.W.2d 709 Minn. 1982
    State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29
  • State v. Orscanin 266 N.W.2d 880 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Orscanin 266 N.W.2d 880 Minn. 1978
    State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29 , State v. Keiser, 274 Minn. 265
  • State v. Fossen 255 N.W.2d 357 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Fossen 255 N.W.2d 357 Minn. 1977
    *421 The burden of establishing that the requisite warning was administered lies with the state and must be established by a preponderance of the evidence, State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29 , Lego v. Twomey, 404 U. S. 477 , 92 S. Ct. 619 , 30 L. ed. 2d 618 (1972).
  • Doan v. State 234 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1975
  • Doan v. State 234 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1975
    That the state need prove voluntariness only by a fair preponderance .of the evidence and not beyond a reasonable doubt at a Jackson v. Denno hearing is made clear by State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29
  • 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. LaFrance 223 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1974
  • State v. LaFrance 223 N.W.2d 813 Minn. 1974
    See, State v. Wajda, 296 Minn. 29