Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Hill, 253 N.W.2d 378.

58 citing documents.

State v. Wakefield 263 N.W.2d 76 Minn. 1978
State v. Wakefield 263 N.W.2d 76 Minn. 1978
The issue relating to the admission of polygraph test results is settled by our recent decision in State v. Hill, Minn., where we refused to reconsider our longstanding rule against the admissibility of such evidence.
State v. Daby 260 N.W.2d 470 Minn. 1977
State v. Daby 260 N.W.2d 470 Minn. 1977
See, State v. Hill, Minn., State v. Miles, Minn., State v. Jensen, Minn., State v. Thomas, 307 Minn. 229
State v. Olsen 258 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 1977
State v. Olsen 258 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 1977
The test for determining whether a new trial should be granted because of the purported recantation by a witness of trial testimony was set forth by this court in Whelan v. State, 298 Minn. 545 , and recently reaffirmed in State v. Hill, Minn.
State v. Houle 257 N.W.2d 320 Minn. 1977
State v. Houle 257 N.W.2d 320 Minn. 1977
hich clothes every person accused of a crime with a presumption of innocence and imposes upon the state the burden of establishing his guilt beyond a reasonable doubt is not to aid the guilty to escape punishment but is to guard against the danger of an innocent man being unjustly convicted and punished.” In State v. Thomas, Minn., and more recently in State v. Hill, Minn., we took exception to similar statements made by a prosecutor during final argument.