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. Knaffla, 243 N.W.2d 737.

856 citing documents.

  • Powers v. State 688 N.W.2d 559 Minn. 2004
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Torres v. State 688 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2004
  • Torres v. State 688 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2004
    Thus Torres’ claim does not fall within any exception to the procedural bar of State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246 , and we affirm the denial of his petition.
  • Spann v. State 686 N.W.2d 868 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • Washington v. State 675 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 2004
  • Washington v. State 675 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 2004
  • Henderson v. State 675 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 2004
  • Henderson v. State 675 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 2004
    Without conducting a hearing on the petition, the postconviction court noted that the issues raised were known on direct appeal and therefore were barred by our decision in State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246
  • McDonough v. State 675 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 2004
  • McDonough v. State 675 N.W.2d 53 Minn. 2004
    Additionally, once a direct appeal has been taken “all matters raised therein, and all claims known but not raised, will not be considered upon a subsequent petition for postconvietion relief.” State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Greer v. State 673 N.W.2d 151 Minn. 2004
  • Greer v. State 673 N.W.2d 151 Minn. 2004
    In State v. Knaffla, we established that once a petitioner has directly appealed a conviction, all matters raised in that appeal, and all matters that were known but not raised, “will not be considered upon a subsequent petition for post-conviction relief.” 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Jones v. State 671 N.W.2d 743 Minn. 2003
  • Jones v. State 671 N.W.2d 743 Minn. 2003
    441 (Minn.1999) (citing State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252 , (the “Knaffla rule”)).
  • Sessions v. State 666 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 2003
  • Sessions v. State 666 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 2003
    The court’s memorandum reasoned that three of Sessions’ claims were known at the time of the direct appeal, -28 (Minn.1998), which relies on our seminal ruling in State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246
  • Butala v. State 664 N.W.2d 333 Minn. 2003
  • Butala v. State 664 N.W.2d 333 Minn. 2003
    -25 (Minn.1996); State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 253-54 , -42 (1976).
  • State v. Greer 662 N.W.2d 121 Minn. 2003
  • State v. Greer 662 N.W.2d 121 Minn. 2003
    We have previously held that “where direct appeal has once been taken, all matters raised therein, and all claims known but not raised, will not be considered upon a subsequent petition for postconviction relief.” State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Doppler v. State 660 N.W.2d 797 Minn. 2003
  • Doppler v. State 660 N.W.2d 797 Minn. 2003
    In State v. Knaffla, we established that once a petitioner has directly appealed a conviction, all matters raised in that appeal, and all matters that were known but not raised, “will not be considered upon a subsequent petition for postconviction relief.” 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Ives v. State 655 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 2003
  • Ives v. State 655 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 2003
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252 , see also Minn.Stat.
  • Johnson v. State 654 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • Johnson v. State 654 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • State v. Johnson 653 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Johnson 653 N.W.2d 646 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • King v. State 649 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2002
  • King v. State 649 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2002
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252 , see also Minn.Stat.
  • Townsend v. State 646 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 2002
  • Townsend v. State 646 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 2002
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Ferguson v. State 645 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 2002
  • Ferguson v. State 645 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 2002
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Boitnott v. State 640 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 2002
  • Boitnott v. State 640 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 2002
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Pierson v. State 637 N.W.2d 571 Minn. 2002
  • Robledo-Kinney v. State 637 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2002
  • Pierson v. State 637 N.W.2d 571 Minn. 2002
    The postconviction court concluded that this claim was procedurally barred under State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246
  • Robledo-Kinney v. State 637 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2002
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Severson v. State 636 N.W.2d 808 Minn. 2001
  • Severson v. State 636 N.W.2d 808 Minn. 2001
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Boitnott v. State 631 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 2001
  • Boitnott v. State 631 N.W.2d 362 Minn. 2001
    3, and this court’s holding in State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246 , bar Boitnott from raising the same claims in this second petition for postconviction relief.
  • Sanders v. State 628 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 2001
  • Sanders v. State 628 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 2001
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Voorhees v. State 627 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 2001
  • Voorhees v. State 627 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 2001
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252
  • Dukes v. State 621 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2001
  • Dukes v. State 621 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2001
    State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246