DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Hudson, 281 N.W.2d 870.

26 citing documents.

  • State v. Lewis 547 N.W.2d 360 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Lewis 547 N.W.2d 360 Minn. 1996
    arged offense; both were pharmacy robberies in which the robbers ordered the victims to lie on the floor, demanded “Class A drugs” and ordered the victims “not to push the button”); (prosecution of rape-kidnapping; upholding admission on issue of identity of evidence of prior acts that were strikingly similar and closely related in time); (holding it proper to admit other robbery to prove identity where other robbery was committed within five days of charged robbery and robber in each case used
  • State v. Cogshell 538 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Cogshell 538 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 1995
    arged offense; both were pharmacy robberies in which the robbers ordered the victims to he 'on the floor, demanded “Class A drugs” and ordered the victims “not to push the button”); (prosecution of rape-kidnapping; upholding admission on issue of identity of evidence of prior acts that were strikingly similar and closely related in time); (holding it proper to admit other robbery to prove identity where other robbery was committed within five days of charged robbery and robber in each ease used
  • State v. Jackson 469 N.W.2d 457 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. Jackson 469 N.W.2d 457 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. Slowinski 450 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1990
  • State v. Slowinski 450 N.W.2d 107 Minn. 1990
  • State v. Perez 397 N.W.2d 916 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Perez 397 N.W.2d 916 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Billstrom , 276 Minn, at 178-79, d at 284 ; (“evidence of identity was not conclusive, and, therefore, evidence of other crimes was necessary to prove that defendant was the robber”).
  • State v. Perez 380 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Perez 380 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    801(c) and was not in violation of the right of confrontation, citing Dutton v. Evans, 400 U.S. 74 , 91 S.Ct.
  • State v. Sirek 374 N.W.2d 481 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Sirek 374 N.W.2d 481 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Stephens v. State 369 N.W.2d 603 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • Stephens v. State 369 N.W.2d 603 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Hanley 363 N.W.2d 735 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Hanley 363 N.W.2d 735 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Swanson 353 N.W.2d 128 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Swanson 353 N.W.2d 128 Minn. 1984
    also supports admitting the statements.
  • State v. Davidson 351 N.W.2d 8 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Davidson 351 N.W.2d 8 Minn. 1984
  • State v. McLane 346 N.W.2d 688 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. McLane 346 N.W.2d 688 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    (probable cause for arrest).
  • State v. Scott 323 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Scott 323 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1982