Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Caldwell, 322 N.W.2d 574.

163 citing documents.

State v. Norris 428 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1988
State v. Norris 428 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1988
State v. Merrill 428 N.W.2d 361 Minn. 1988
State v. Merrill 428 N.W.2d 361 Minn. 1988
State v. Erdman 422 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 1988
State v. Erdman 422 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 1988
The correct rule is, , 585 including at n. 8 (Minn.1982), that a defendant should be given a new trial on the basis of recantation of testimony by a material witness only if the trial court is reasonably satisfied that the testimony was false, that the party was taken by surprise by the testimony and was unable to meet it or did not know
State v. Davis 422 N.W.2d 296 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Davis 422 N.W.2d 296 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
the Minnesota Supreme Court applied Larrison to require a new trial when the testimony of the fingerprint expert was later determined to be inaccurate.
Dye v. State 411 N.W.2d 897 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Dye v. State 411 N.W.2d 897 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-85 (Minn.1982) (emphasis in original).
Potter v. State 410 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Potter v. State 410 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Wilford 408 N.W.2d 577 Minn. 1987
State v. Wilford 408 N.W.2d 577 Minn. 1987
State v. Harris 407 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Harris 407 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Whiteside 400 N.W.2d 140 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Whiteside 400 N.W.2d 140 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Furthermore, “[cjourts have traditionally looked with disfavor on motions for a new trial founded on alleged recantations unless there are extraordinary and unusual circumstances.” State v. Hill, 312 Minn. 514, 523 , , 585 n. 7 (1982) (“Courts tend to view recanted testimony with suspicion because of the possibility that it was obtained through coercion”).
Sanders v. State 400 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Sanders v. State 400 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Rothering 397 N.W.2d 346 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Rothering 397 N.W.2d 346 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Mitjans 394 N.W.2d 221 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Mitjans 394 N.W.2d 221 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See State v. *228 Caldwell, (appellant did not receive a fair trial because the jury heard false testimony of a highly incriminating nature); (cumulative effect of errs required reversal).
State v. Casady 392 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Casady 392 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Morgan v. State 384 N.W.2d 458 Minn. 1986
Morgan v. State 384 N.W.2d 458 Minn. 1986
State v. Race 383 N.W.2d 656 Minn. 1986
State v. Race 383 N.W.2d 656 Minn. 1986
Tucker v. State, 309 Minn. 482, 489
State v. Buchmann 380 N.W.2d 879 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Smith 380 N.W.2d 611 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Buchmann 380 N.W.2d 879 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Smith 380 N.W.2d 611 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Coulthard 379 N.W.2d 623 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Coulthard 379 N.W.2d 623 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Harmening 376 N.W.2d 254 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Harmening 376 N.W.2d 254 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Saiki v. State 375 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Saiki v. State 375 N.W.2d 547 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Berry v. State 364 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1985
Berry v. State 364 N.W.2d 795 Minn. 1985
State v. Walker 358 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 1984
State v. Garasha 358 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1984
State v. Walker 358 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 1984
State v. Garasha 358 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 1984
r to obtain a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evi *660 dence, the defendant has to establish that the evidence was not known to him at the time of trial, that his failure to learn of it was not due to lack of diligence, that the evidence is material, and that it will probably produce an acquittal at a retrial.”
State v. Mattson 356 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Mattson 356 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
An appellate court “cannot retry the facts but must take the view most favorable to the State and must assume that the jury believed the State’s witnesses and disbelieved any contrary evidence.”
State v. Rean 353 N.W.2d 562 Minn. 1984
State v. Rean 353 N.W.2d 562 Minn. 1984