Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Watts v. State, 305 N.W.2d 860.
- State v. Kroshus 447 N.W.2d 203 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- State v. Kroshus 447 N.W.2d 203 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- State v. Robinson 427 N.W.2d 217 Minn. 1988
-
State v. Robinson
427 N.W.2d 217
Minn. 1988
See, (the record furnished failed to establish prejudicial error).
- State v. Vance 392 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Vance 392 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Powell 357 N.W.2d 146 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
-
State v. Powell
357 N.W.2d 146
Minn. Ct. App. 1984
See United States v. Griffin, 530 F.2d 739, 742 (7th Cir.1976)
- State v. Nelson 355 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 1984
- State v. Nelson 355 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 1984
- State v. Wiplinger 343 N.W.2d 858 Minn. 1984
- State v. Howard 324 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 1982
- State v. Howard 324 N.W.2d 216 Minn. 1982
- State v. Hatcher 322 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 1982
- State v. Hatcher 322 N.W.2d 210 Minn. 1982
- State v. Caswell 320 N.W.2d 417 Minn. 1982
- State v. Caswell 320 N.W.2d 417 Minn. 1982
- Muhammed v. State 316 N.W.2d 572 Minn. 1982
- Muhammed v. State 316 N.W.2d 572 Minn. 1982
- State v. Miller 316 N.W.2d 23 Minn. 1982
-
State v. Miller
316 N.W.2d 23
Minn. 1982
Even taking into account the fact that the United States Supreme Court in recent cases appears to have endorsed a “practical, less-than-literal application of the rule,” we have doubts about the soundness of such a ruling in this case because the case was tried on stipulated facts, without any testimony by the victims identifying defendant or any of the objects found in his apartment, and it seems highly likely that the confession played a significant role in influe
- State v. Hinkle 310 N.W.2d 97 Minn. 1981
- State v. Hinkle 310 N.W.2d 97 Minn. 1981
- State v. Galde 306 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 1981
- State v. Galde 306 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 1981
- State v. Gant 305 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1981
- State v. Gant 305 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1981