Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Olkon, 299 N.W.2d 89.
- State v. Swanson 498 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 1993
-
State v. Swanson
498 N.W.2d 435
Minn. 1993
Transcripts should not ordinarily be admitted into evidence unless both sides stipulate to their accuracy and agree to their use as evidence.” ce rt.
- State v. Carnahan 482 N.W.2d 793 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
- State v. Carnahan 482 N.W.2d 793 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
- State v. O'HAGAN 474 N.W.2d 613 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
-
State v. O'HAGAN
474 N.W.2d 613
Minn. Ct. App. 1991
(evi-dentiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the trial court).
- In Re the Welfare of G.D. 473 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
-
In Re the Welfare of G.D.
473 N.W.2d 878
Minn. Ct. App. 1991
To establish inducement, appellant had to produce evidence of “persuasion, badgering, or pressure by the state.” ce rt.
- State v. Lund 474 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
- State v. Lund 474 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
- State v. Brown 455 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
- State v. Brown 455 N.W.2d 65 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
- State v. Glaze 452 N.W.2d 655 Minn. 1990
-
State v. Glaze
452 N.W.2d 655
Minn. 1990
-16 (Minn.1984); -02 (Minn.1980), cert.
- State v. Barsness 446 N.W.2d 666 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- State v. Moore 438 N.W.2d 101 Minn. 1989
-
State v. Moore
438 N.W.2d 101
Minn. 1989
See 1 ABA Standards for Criminal Justice § 3-3.6(b) (1979), (“No prosecutor should knowingly fail to disclose to the grand jury evidence which will tend to substantially negate guilt.”); -106 (Minn.1980) cert denied 449 U.S. 1132 , 101 S.Ct.
- Ruberg v. State 428 N.W.2d 488 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
-
Ruberg v. State
428 N.W.2d 488
Minn. Ct. App. 1988
In determining the sufficiency of evidence in a criminal matter, the reviewing court “ ‘must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the jury verdict and decide whether the jury could reasonably have found [appellant] guilty of the crime charged.’ ” cert.
- State v. Norris 428 N.W.2d 61 Minn. 1988
-
State v. Norris
428 N.W.2d 61
Minn. 1988
5 We have held that the “essence of a swindle is the defrauding of another of his property by deliberate artifice.”
- State v. Rothstein 422 N.W.2d 300 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
- State v. Rothstein 422 N.W.2d 300 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
- State v. Flores 418 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1988
- State v. Flores 418 N.W.2d 150 Minn. 1988
- State v. Holscher 417 N.W.2d 698 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
- State v. Holscher 417 N.W.2d 698 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
- State v. Lenorud 412 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Lenorud 412 N.W.2d 816 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Ailport 412 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Ailport 412 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Rice 411 N.W.2d 260 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Rice 411 N.W.2d 260 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Porter 411 N.W.2d 187 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Jenkins 411 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Boyd 410 N.W.2d 445 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Jenkins 411 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-
State v. Porter
411 N.W.2d 187
Minn. Ct. App. 1987
On review, this court “must view the evidence in a light most favorable to the jury verdict and decide whether the jury could reasonably have found the defendant guilty of the crime charged.” cert.
- State v. Torkelson 404 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Torkelson 404 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Iten 401 N.W.2d 127 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Iten 401 N.W.2d 127 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
- State v. Benedict 397 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1986
- State v. Benedict 397 N.W.2d 337 Minn. 1986
- State v. Hagen 391 N.W.2d 888 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Hagen 391 N.W.2d 888 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Larson 389 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1986
-
State v. Larson
389 N.W.2d 872
Minn. 1986
A trial court has broad discretion to make evidentiary rulings, cert.
- State v. Ackerman 380 N.W.2d 922 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Ackerman 380 N.W.2d 922 Minn. Ct. App. 1986