Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Billups, 264 N.W.2d 137.

33 citing documents.

Brian Ford Dowell, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
To convince us otherwise
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Doyle v. Ohio, 426 U.S. 610, 619, 96 S. Ct. 2240, 2245 (1976); -39 (Minn. 1978).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
426 U.S. at 619, 96 S. Ct. at 2245; accord State v. Billups , d 137, 139 (Minn. 1978) (holding that it was error to permit the state to impeach a defendant by cross-examination on his failure to offer alibi evidence at any tim e prior to the trial).
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Lamonthe White Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Lamonthe White Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(holding that counsel- advised silence is protected to the same extent as silence following a Miranda warning).
State v. Borg 806 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2011
State v. Borg 806 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2011
(per curiam), to support its assertion that due process is violated when a defendant’s silence is used against him at trial, if that silence follows the invocation of a right to counsel.
State v. Borg 780 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Borg 780 N.W.2d 8 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. McDaniel 777 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 2010
State v. McDaniel 777 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 2010
2240 , 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976); impeachment of an accused by his pre-arrest silence is not constitutionally improper when a defendant chooses to testify in his own defense, Jenkins v. Anderson, 447 U.S. 231, 238-39 , 100 S.Ct.
State v. Jones 753 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 2008
State v. Jones 753 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 2008
See, -10 (Minn.2006) (silence used as impeachment); (post-arrest failure to testify before grand jury); (post-arrest silence); (same); (post-arrest silence on advice of counsel); State v. Roberts, 296 Minn. 347, 349-53 , -48 (1973) (post-arrest silence).
State v. Dobbins 725 N.W.2d 492 Minn. 2006
State v. Dobbins 725 N.W.2d 492 Minn. 2006
Shortly after Doyle was decided
State v. Leja 660 N.W.2d 459 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Leja 660 N.W.2d 459 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
(following Billups in holding counseled pre-arrest, pre-Miranda silence may not be used for impeachment).
State v. Klosterboer 529 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Klosterboer 529 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(a defendant may not be impeached by his failure to offer alibi evidence at any time prior to trial); Richardson, d at 578 (same).
State v. Richardson 514 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Richardson 514 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Brown 500 N.W.2d 784 Minn. 1993
State v. Brown 500 N.W.2d 784 Minn. 1993
The court of appeals, concluded that this line of questioning violated Defendant’s right against self-incrimination under the Minnesota Constitution.
State v. Moore 493 N.W.2d 606 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Moore 493 N.W.2d 606 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
2240, 2241 , 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976); -39 (Minn.1978).
State v. Brown 488 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Brown 488 N.W.2d 848 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
*852 The seminal Minnesota case discussing admissibility of counseled
State v. Dunkel 466 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Dunkel 466 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
1 a case predating Jenkins , the Minnesota Supreme Court directly addressed the issue of whether ^re-Miranda silence upon advice of counsel may be used to impeach.
State v. Clark 296 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1980
State v. Clark 296 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1980
2240 , 49 L.Ed.2d 91 (1976)
State v. Sailor 289 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 1980
State v. Sailor 289 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 1980
filed after rehearing and after the trial in this case, makes it clear that the prosecutor’s cross-examination in this case was improper.