DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Webber, 292 N.W.2d 5.

38 citing documents.

  • State v. Fairbanks 842 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 2014
  • State v. Fairbanks 842 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 2014
    (reviewing for an abuse of discretion the district court’s decision to change venue to a county to which the defendant objected).
  • State v. Zornes 831 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2013
  • State v. Zornes 831 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2013
    We have held that “[a] trial court’s admission of physical evidence will be upheld unless it constitutes an abuse of discretion.” (); (reviewing the admission of evidence under the abuse-of-discretion standard).
  • State v. Jones 647 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Jones 647 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    An abuse of discretion occurs where- the evidence is such that “a real possibility exists that a jury will not render an unprejudiced or unbiased verdict.” (quoting State v. Hogan, 297 Minn. 430, 437 , ).
  • State v. Lewis 638 N.W.2d 788 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Lewis 638 N.W.2d 788 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    An abuse of discretion occurs when the evidence is such that “a real possibility exists that a jury will not render an unprejudiced or unbiased verdict.” (quoting State v. Hogan, 297 Minn. 430, 437 , ).
  • State v. Harris 405 N.W.2d 224 Minn. 1987
  • State v. Harris 405 N.W.2d 224 Minn. 1987
    375, 381-382 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972); -11 (Minn.1980); -08 (Minn.1979).
  • State v. Iverson 396 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Iverson 396 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the admissibility of evidence relating to weapons that were accessible to the accused as probative of the conspiracy between the accused and his alleged accomplice.
  • State v. Hathaway 379 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Hathaway 379 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Buschkopf 373 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Howard 373 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Buschkopf 373 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Howard 373 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Daniels 361 N.W.2d 819 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Daniels 361 N.W.2d 819 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Gist 358 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Gist 358 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Dillard 355 N.W.2d 167 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Dillard 355 N.W.2d 167 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    375 , 34 L.Ed.2d 401 (1972)
  • State v. Kinsky 348 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Kinsky 348 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1984
    Where, as here, defendant’s motion is based on the prospective jurors’ answers during voir dire, defendant must “do more than elicit an admission from the potential juror that he has been exposed to pretrial publicity.” Beier, d at 626
  • State v. Gayles 327 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Gayles 327 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Suedel 325 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Suedel 325 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1982
    Minnesota eases which in varying degrees support the trial court’s (admission of firearm in murder prosecution was for the purpose of connecting the defendant to the crime, not to create unfair prejudice); (silverware bag found in car of defendant at time of arrest was properly admitted in burglary prosecution where there was
  • State v. Howard 324 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Johnson 324 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Johnson 324 N.W.2d 199 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Howard 324 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 1982
    wherein we upheld the conviction of Bruce Web-ber.
  • State v. Marquetti 322 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Marquetti 322 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Darveaux 318 N.W.2d 44 Minn. 1982
  • State v. Darveaux 318 N.W.2d 44 Minn. 1982
    State v. Witt, 310 Minn. 211