Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Kjeldahl, 278 N.W.2d 58.

34 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Lisa Dawn Oliver Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Dawn Oliver Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Emanuel Garza Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Emanuel Garza Minn. Ct. App. 2024
And three years after that, the court clarified that, although “the [escape] statute does not include a requirement of specific intent,” it does include the required element of “the [general] intent to do the act which results in the departure from custody.” d 58, 61 (Minn. 1979) (emphasis added).
Nikita Nikel Dixon, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
This offense is not a specific-intent crime, as “the only intent required to constitute the crime of escape is the intent to do the act which results in the departure from custody.” see also State v. Knox, 311 Minn. 314, 322, (stating that acts constituting escape-from-custody offense “must be intentional and voluntary”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
The offense is not a specific-intent crime: “the only intent required to constitute the crime of escape is the intent to do the act which results in the departure from custody.” see State v. Knox , 311 Minn. 314, 322, d 147, 154 (1976) (stating that the acts that constitute the offense of esca pe from custody “must be intentional and voluntary”).
State of Minnesota v. Galen Dale Littlewind Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Galen Dale Littlewind Minn. Ct. App. 2017
The supreme court applied this rule and qualification to the crime of escape and concluded that “the only intent required to constitute the crime of escape is the intent to do the act which results in the departure from custody.” see also State v. Knox, 311 Minn. 314, 322, 3 (stating that “[u]nder [section] 609.485, the acts must be intentional and voluntary in order for the departure to constitute an escape”); (
State v. Bauer 776 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Bauer 776 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
3 Id.; (recognizing that legislature may criminalize conduct without regard to intention or motive of actor).
State v. Bjergum 771 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Bjergum 771 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
-04 (Minn.App.1991) (stating that a voluntary-intoxication instruction will be given only if specific intent is one of the crime’s essential elements); , 62 n. 10 (Minn.1979) (declining to reach question of voluntary intoxication after holding that specific intent was not an essential element for the crime of escape).
State v. LORSUNG 658 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. LORSUNG 658 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Hage 595 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1999
State v. Hage 595 N.W.2d 200 Minn. 1999
2319 ; -77 (Minn.1996); -62 (Minn.1979).
State v. McKinney 575 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. McKinney 575 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
-61 (Minn.1979); see also Kerns v. Parratt, 672 F.2d 690, 691 (8th Cir.1982) (holding prison disciplinary proceeding that resulted in defendant’s loss of good time credit did not place defendant “in jeopardy” and did not bar criminal prosecution for assault).
State v. Orsello 554 N.W.2d 70 Minn. 1996
State v. Orsello 554 N.W.2d 70 Minn. 1996
In his second statutory argument, where this court held that the legislature could criminalize an act without mention of a required intent level and thereby create a general intent crime.
State v. Landherr 542 N.W.2d 686 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Landherr 542 N.W.2d 686 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. McKenzie 542 N.W.2d 616 Minn. 1996
State v. McKenzie 542 N.W.2d 616 Minn. 1996
State v. Orsello 529 N.W.2d 481 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Orsello 529 N.W.2d 481 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(citing *484 State v. Reps, 302 Minn. 38, 46 , ).
State v. Olson 478 N.W.2d 218 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Olson 478 N.W.2d 218 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Bouwman 328 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1982
State v. Lindahl 309 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 1981
State v. Lindahl 309 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 1981