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. Linder, 268 N.W.2d 734.

127 citing documents.

  • State v. Jackson 351 N.W.2d 352 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Ture 353 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Jackson 351 N.W.2d 352 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Jungbauer 348 N.W.2d 344 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Ponte-Alfonzo 348 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Jungbauer 348 N.W.2d 344 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Ponte-Alfonzo 348 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 1984
    We will move to exclude the conversation from the record at this point.” we stated, “[I]f the prosecutor shows that the [Miranda ] warning was given and that the defendant stated he understood his rights and then gave a statement, the state will be deemed to have met its burden of proof, unless there is other evidence indicating that there was no knowing, intelligent, and
  • State v. Kivimaki 345 N.W.2d 759 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Kivimaki 345 N.W.2d 759 Minn. 1984
    the court outlined the analysis to be followed in determining the voluntariness issue: In an ordinary case if the prosecutor shows that the warning was given and that defendant stated he understood his rights and then gave a statement, the state will be deemed to have met its burden of proof, unless there is o
  • State v. Brown 345 N.W.2d 233 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Brown 345 N.W.2d 233 Minn. 1984
    1880 , 68 L.Ed.2d 378 (1981) (a waiver of the right to counsel must be a voluntary, knowing, and intelligent relinquishment of a known right); (under the totality of the circumstances, a defendant’s waiver of right to counsel must be knowing, intelligent, and voluntary) Abuzzahab testified.
  • State v. Ngoc Van Vu 339 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1983
  • State v. Ngoc Van Vu 339 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 1983
  • State v. Kulseth 333 N.W.2d 635 Minn. 1983
  • State v. Kulseth 333 N.W.2d 635 Minn. 1983
  • State v. Miller 316 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Miller 316 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 1982
    For a summary of the law bearing on voluntariness of confessions
  • State v. Smith 305 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1981
  • State v. Smith 305 N.W.2d 798 Minn. 1981
    and require no repetition here.
  • State v. Linder 304 N.W.2d 902 Minn. 1981
  • State v. Linder 304 N.W.2d 902 Minn. 1981
  • State v. Morgan 296 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1980
  • State v. Morgan 296 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1980
    that in reviewing a trial court ruling on the issue whether a waiver of constitutional rights was knowing and intelligent: [T]his court will not reverse specific findings of the district court unless they are clearly erroneous, but this court will make an independent determination, on the basis of th
  • State v. Vangstad 289 N.W.2d 468 Minn. 1979
  • State v. Vangstad 289 N.W.2d 468 Minn. 1979
    2254 , 45 L.Ed.2d 416 (1975)
  • Jensen v. State 278 N.W.2d 752 Minn. 1979
  • Jensen v. State 278 N.W.2d 752 Minn. 1979
    ordinarily “if the prosecutor shows that the warning was given and that defendant stated he understood his rights and then gave a statement, the state will be deemed to have met its burden of proof, unless there is other evidence indicating that there was no knowing, intelligent, and voluntary waiver