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. Nunn, 297 N.W.2d 752.

68 citing documents.

  • , A22-0290 Minn. 2023
    ient evidence to support a felony-murder conviction where there was no direct evidence of who stabbed the victim, but the defendant knocked the victim out of his wheelchair, stole the victim’s property with a codefendant, removed all identifying evidence from the victim’s home, and fled the state because burglarizing a dwelling always carries a possibility of violence); –54 (Minn. 1980) (holding that a victim’s death was a reasonably foreseeable consequence of a burglary given that burglary of a
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    - 54 (Minn. 1980), which 33 interpreted an earlier version of the same statute.
  • State of Minnesota v. Tommy William Mix Minn. Ct. App. 2016
  • State of Minnesota v. Tommy William Mix Minn. Ct. App. 2016
    (holding that burglary of a dwelling “should not be deemed a purely property offense because .
  • State of Minnesota v. Gregory Thomas Wandzel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
  • State of Minnesota v. Gregory Thomas Wandzel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
    The supreme court noted that, because 5 burglary “always carries with it the possibility of violence and therefore some special risks to human life,” belief that a burglary may be in progress may justify an officer’s warrantless entry into a home, Lemieux, d at 789.
  • State v. Zais 805 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 2011
  • State v. Zais 805 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 2011
    Our conclusion is also consistent with other cases in which we have interpreted the meaning of crimes committed “against a person.” In State v. Nunn, we considered the meaning of a felony-murder requirement that the underlying felony must have been “upon or affecting the person whose death was caused.”
  • State v. Spence 768 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Spence 768 N.W.2d 104 Minn. 2009
    (noting that burglary of a dwelling should not be deemed a purely property offense, because it carries with it the possibility of violence and risk to personal safety such that it creates a "special danger to human life”); -90 (Minn.2007); State v. Myers, 62
  • State v. Smoot 737 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
  • State v. Smoot 737 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
    The supreme court interpreted this language as isolating “for special treatment those felonies that involve some special danger to human life.”
  • State v. Lemieux 726 N.W.2d 783 Minn. 2007
  • State v. Lemieux 726 N.W.2d 783 Minn. 2007
    Burglary of a dwelling is not “deemed a purely property offense because * * * such an offense always carries with it the possibility of violence and therefore some special risks to human life.”
  • State v. Anderson 666 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2003
  • State v. Anderson 666 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2003
    In State v. Nunn, we stated that the justification for this limitation was to “isolate for special treatment those felonies that involve some special danger to human life.”
  • State v. Anderson 654 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Anderson 654 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    The supreme court stated that the justification for this restriction was to “isolate for special treatment those felonies that involve some special danger to human life.”
  • State v. Myers 627 N.W.2d 58 Minn. 2001
  • State v. Myers 627 N.W.2d 58 Minn. 2001
  • State v. Craven 628 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Craven 628 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
    (holding predicate felony must involve “special danger” to human life); review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • State v. Munger 597 N.W.2d 570 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • State v. Munger 597 N.W.2d 570 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    1 (holding that, for purposes of consecutive sentencing under guidelines, first-degree burglary may, depending on facts, be treated as crime against person) (), review denied (Minn. Dec.
  • Smith v. State 596 N.W.2d 661 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Smith v. State 596 N.W.2d 661 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    M.D.S., d at 729 (); (acknowledging traditional limitation that predicate felony must involve special danger to human life based on case’s facts and circumstances).
  • State v. Jones 566 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Jones 566 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 1997
    (concluding that appellant's status as high-school student implied that he had experienced sufficient education, among other factors, to make a knowing, intelligent and voluntary waiver of his right to remain silent).
  • State v. Cole 542 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Cole 542 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1996
    endant, at the time of effecting the death of Michael Hogan, was committing, or attempting to commit, the felony offense of theft or the felony offense of felony assault in the second degree.” This court noted that application of the felony murder statute, prior to 1981, was limited to predicate felonies involving a “special danger to human life.” Branson, d at 883 ().
  • State v. Parsley 529 N.W.2d 675 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Parsley 529 N.W.2d 675 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Branson 487 N.W.2d 880 Minn. 1992
  • State v. Branson 487 N.W.2d 880 Minn. 1992
    we said the purpose of that restriction was “to isolate for special treatment those felonies that involve some special danger to human life.” Id.
  • State v. Notch 446 N.W.2d 383 Minn. 1989
  • State v. Notch 446 N.W.2d 383 Minn. 1989
    (dealing with use of burglary of a dwelling as the predicate offense for felony murder).
  • State v. Merrill 428 N.W.2d 361 Minn. 1988
  • State v. Merrill 428 N.W.2d 361 Minn. 1988
    This court has previously recognized that the burglary of a dwelling “always carries with it the possibility of violence.”
  • State v. Hunt 419 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Hunt 419 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    Although burglary convictions have been held to be person crimes for the purposes of consecutive sentencing, the facts must show that the crime “obviously involved special danger to human life.”
  • State v. Larsen 413 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Larsen 413 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Mitjans 408 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1987
  • State v. Mitjans 408 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 1987
  • State v. Henderson 394 N.W.2d 561 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Henderson 394 N.W.2d 561 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    the supreme court closely examined the issue of whether burglary was a person or a property offense.
  • Walker v. State 394 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Walker v. State 394 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Scheuble 392 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Scheuble 392 N.W.2d 342 Minn. Ct. App. 1986