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. Leinweber, 228 N.W.2d 120.

224 citing documents.

  • LaMere v. State 278 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1979
  • LaMere v. State 278 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 1979
    State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414
  • State v. Merrill 274 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Merrill 274 N.W.2d 99 Minn. 1978
    In State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414, 422 , we enunciated the following two-part test for determining when lesser degrees of an offense must be submitted to the jury: (1) the evidence would reasonably support a conviction of the lesser degree, and (2) the evidence would justify a finding of not guilty of the greater offense.
  • State v. Reilly 269 N.W.2d 343 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Reilly 269 N.W.2d 343 Minn. 1978
    Defendant argues that State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414 , 228 N.W.
  • State v. Swain 269 N.W.2d 707 Minn. 1978
  • State v. Swain 269 N.W.2d 707 Minn. 1978
    In State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414 , this court set forth five tests governing the submission of lesser included offenses.
  • State v. Nesgoda 261 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Nesgoda 261 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 1977
    As we held in State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414 , the test which must be applied in determining whether to submit a lesser-included offense is whether there is evidence which produces a rational basis for a verdict acquitting defendant of the offense charged and con *357 victing him of the lesser offense.
  • State v. Briggs 256 N.W.2d 305 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Briggs 256 N.W.2d 305 Minn. 1977
    As we held in State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414, 422 , the test which must be applied in determining whether to submit a lesser-included offense is whether there is evidence which produces a rational basis for a verdict acquitting defendant of the offense charged and convicting him of the lesser offense.
  • State v. McDonald 251 N.W.2d 705 Minn. 1977
  • State v. McDonald 251 N.W.2d 705 Minn. 1977
    1 See, State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414, 422
  • State v. Gegenfurtner 251 N.W.2d 694 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Gegenfurtner 251 N.W.2d 694 Minn. 1977
    We also find that under the facts of this case defendant would have been entitled to submission of the lesser included offense if he had requested it, State v. Gafner, 283 Minn. 466 , and the trial court on its own could have submitted the offense even if defendant had not requested it, State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414
  • State v. Malzac 244 N.W.2d 258 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Malzac 244 N.W.2d 258 Minn. 1976
    I The leading Minnesota cases on the issue of whether the jury should be instructed on lesser and included offenses are State v. Jordan, 272 Minn. 84 , and State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414
  • State v. Swanson 240 N.W.2d 822 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Swanson 240 N.W.2d 822 Minn. 1976
    State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414 , State v. Pankratz, 238 Minn. 517
  • State v. Walker 235 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 1975
  • Distinguished State v. Walker 235 N.W.2d 810 Minn. 1975
    Therefore, the case is distinguishable from our recent case of State v. Leinweber, 308 Minn. 414
  • State v. St. Christopher 232 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1975
  • State v. St. Christopher 232 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1975
    9 See, State v. Leinweber, 303 Minn. 414