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. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197.

327 citing documents.

  • State v. Tate 682 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Tate 682 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 128
  • State v. Johnson 679 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Johnson 679 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
    See State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • State v. Johnson 672 N.W.2d 235 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Johnson 672 N.W.2d 235 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28
  • State v. Roman Nose 667 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 2003
  • State v. Roman Nose 667 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 2003
    We concluded that the challenged questions were not as explicit as those comments that we held improper in State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 126 , 12 nor did they make “the slightest suggestion that appellant was obligated to pursue independent testing,” and consequently, the questions did not impermissibly shift the burden of proof.
  • State v. Leja 660 N.W.2d 459 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Leja 660 N.W.2d 459 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28
  • State v. McNeil 658 N.W.2d 228 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. McNeil 658 N.W.2d 228 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 128
  • State v. Houston 654 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Houston 654 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 128
  • State v. Jarvis 649 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Jarvis 649 N.W.2d 186 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28
  • State v. Steward 645 N.W.2d 115 Minn. 2002
  • State v. Steward 645 N.W.2d 115 Minn. 2002
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • State v. Yang 627 N.W.2d 666 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Yang 627 N.W.2d 666 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • State v. Gates 615 N.W.2d 331 Minn. 2000
  • State v. Hunt 615 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 2000
  • State v. Hunt 615 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 2000
    See State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • State v. Gates 615 N.W.2d 331 Minn. 2000
    See State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • Sanderson v. State 601 N.W.2d 219 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Sanderson v. State 601 N.W.2d 219 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • State v. Sewell 595 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • State v. Sewell 595 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    See also State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28 , (for less serious misconduct, the review standard is that of harmless error).
  • State v. Coleman 560 N.W.2d 717 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
  • State v. Coleman 560 N.W.2d 717 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 128
  • State v. McDaniel 534 N.W.2d 290 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • State v. McDaniel 534 N.W.2d 290 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28
  • State v. Peterson 533 N.W.2d 87 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • State v. Peterson 533 N.W.2d 87 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    See State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127 , (“[Djefendant’s failure to object or to request curative instructions weighs heavily in our decision.”); see also Minn.R.Evid.
  • State v. Peterson 530 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • State v. Peterson 530 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    See State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • State v. Porter 526 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Porter 526 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1995
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
  • State v. Washington 521 N.W.2d 35 Minn. 1994
  • State v. Washington 521 N.W.2d 35 Minn. 1994
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 128
  • State v. Richardson 514 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • State v. Richardson 514 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    In cases involving unusually serious misconduct, the reviewing court requires “certainty beyond a reasonable doubt that the misconduct was harmless before affirming.” State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28
  • State v. Her 510 N.W.2d 218 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • State v. Her 510 N.W.2d 218 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    see also State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 128
  • State v. Starkey 507 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • State v. Starkey 507 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28
  • State v. Gassler 505 N.W.2d 62 Minn. 1993
  • State v. Gassler 505 N.W.2d 62 Minn. 1993
    See e.g., State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123 , State v. Bell, 294 Minn. 189
  • State v. Maurer 491 N.W.2d 661 Minn. 1992
  • State v. Maurer 491 N.W.2d 661 Minn. 1992
    As we said in State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127 , “the more serious the [error], the more certain of its effect this court has felt that it should be before labeling the error harmless.” The witnesses’ opinion that complainant was “sincere” when she said she had been raped in this case was what one would expect the witnesses to say