Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Anderson, 275 N.W.2d 554.

26 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Reymundo Gonzalez Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Reymundo Gonzalez Minn. Ct. App. 2024
at 241; see also Ness, d at 688; -56 (Minn. 1978).
State of Minnesota v. Larry Ray House Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Larry Ray House Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See State v. Wermerskirchen , (other -crime evidence was admissible to prove the contested issue of whether defendant sexually touched his pre -adolescent daughter); - 56 (Minn. 1978) (evidence that the defendant sexually abused complainant’s half -sister was admissible to establish that the defendant sexually abused his 14- year-old stepdaughter).
In re Decision to Deny the Petitions for a Contested Case Hearing 924 N.W.2d 638 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In re Decision to Deny the Petitions for a Contested Case Hearing 924 N.W.2d 638 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Safety , , 415 (Minn. 2007) (discussing prejudice requirement in context of driver's license revocation); State v. Anderson , , 555 (Minn. 1978) ("[T]the due process clause protects against delays, including preaccusation delays, that are planned by the prosecution for the purpose of gaining a tactical advantage, if the delays result in actual prejudice to the defendant.").
State of Minnesota v. Kemen Lavatos Taylor, II 869 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Kemen Lavatos Taylor, II 869 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2015
(concluding there was no speedy trial violation in part because the defendant did not show “that there was any attempt by the state to unfairly delay the prosecution in order to gain a tactical advantage”).
State v. Ness 707 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 2006
State v. Kennedy 585 N.W.2d 385 Minn. 1998
State v. Kennedy 585 N.W.2d 385 Minn. 1998
See e.g., Wermerskirchen, d at 241 ; -56 (Minn.1978) (admitting Spreigl evidence to show common scheme or plan and to refute defendant’s allegation that the victim’s testimony was a fabrication); (stating that the Spreigl evidence “was directly relevant to the jury’s resolution of the key factual issue
State v. Wermerskirchen 497 N.W.2d 235 Minn. 1993
State v. Wermerskirchen 497 N.W.2d 235 Minn. 1993
a criminal sexual conduct case based on evidence that defendant sexually abused his 14-year-old stepdaughter.
State v. Haala 415 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Haala 415 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Crocker 409 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1987
State v. Crocker 409 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1987
State v. Dupay 405 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Dupay 405 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(six-year-old Spreigl evidence admitted); -10 (Minn.Ct.App.1987), pet.
State v. Scott 323 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1982
State v. Scott 323 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1982
while one of the prior crimes admitted occurred 6 years before the crime charged, the crime was relevant because there was also evidence of other similar crimes by defendant in the interval showing a pattern of conduct.
Muhammed v. State 316 N.W.2d 572 Minn. 1982
Muhammed v. State 316 N.W.2d 572 Minn. 1982
The specific arguments made by petitioner have been addressed in a number of our cases, including the following:
State v. Bolts 288 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 1980
State v. Bolts 288 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 1980
See, in this regard, (admission of 6-year-old prior crime as Spreigl evidence where it was part of a continuing pattern of conduct).