Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Lussier v. State, 821 N.W.2d 581.

227 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Lester Ray Wiley Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Stanley Allen Brown, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 581, 588-89 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota v. Lester Ray Wiley Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“There must be sufficient facts on the record to support a conclusion that defendant’s conduct falls within the charge to which he desires to plead guilty.” (quotation omitted).
Desiree Nicole Shinholser v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Desiree Nicole Shinholser v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
We will reverse a decision of [the] postconviction court only if that court abused its discretion.” (alteration in original) (quotations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Adaiah Deontraie Townsend 872 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Adaiah Deontraie Townsend 872 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“There must be sufficient facts on the record to support a conclusion that defendant’s conduct falls within the charge to which he desires to plead guilty.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Michael Devon Jarmon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael Devon Jarmon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The “typical way a district court satisfies the accuracy requirement is by asking the defendant to express in his own 8 words what happened.”
State of Minnesota v. Sheikh Nyane Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Sheikh Nyane Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Fredrick Kemond Jackson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Fredrick Kemond Jackson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
We will reverse a decision of the postconviction court only if that court abused its discretion.” (quotations and citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Joseph Knebel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Joseph Knebel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Crystal Marie Vodinelich v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Crystal Marie Vodinelich v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Francisco Herrera Sanchez v. State of Minnesota 868 N.W.2d 282 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Francisco Herrera Sanchez v. State of Minnesota 868 N.W.2d 282 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jose Manuel Flores v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jose Manuel Flores v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Trent Johnson 867 N.W.2d 210 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Earl Anthony Fry Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Trent Johnson 867 N.W.2d 210 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
4(a) (2014); & n.2 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota v. Earl Anthony Fry Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Keon Malone Mangun Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Keon Malone Mangun Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“When reviewing a postconviction court’s decision, we examine only whether the postconviction court’s findings are supported by sufficient evidence.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Robert William Neft Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Robert William Neft Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The Minnesota Supreme Court has “cautioned against the use of exclusively leading questions to establish a proper factual basis for a guilty plea.”
Hector Martinez v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Hector Martinez v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
n.2 (Minn. 2012) (holding that the timeliness of a motion to withdraw a guilty plea after sentencing is treated the same as the “manner in which delays in filing petitions for postconviction relief are treated.”) ().
Robyn Lynn Hager v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Criticized Robyn Lynn Hager v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See, d 581, 589 (Minn. 2012) (“We have previously observed that the typical way a district court satisfies the accuracy requirement is by asking the defendant to express in his own words what happened.
John Stephen Woodward v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
John Stephen Woodward v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Erickson, d at 318 (stating that, “absent an applicable statutory exception, the time bar precludes all of [petitioner]’s claims,” including his ineffective-assistance claim); n.2 (Minn. 2012) (stating that “the timeliness requirements found in section 590.01 apply with equal force to [a] petition” for postconviction relief that asserts a claim for plea withdrawal as to a petition that does not assert such a claim); –01 (Minn. 2013) (distingui
Tha Phongvixay v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Tha Phongvixay v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
DECISION “[A] motion to withdraw a guilty plea made after sentencing must be raised in a petition for postconviction relief.” n.2 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota v. Damien Lashaun Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Damien Lashaun Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Gerald Raymond Gustafson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Gerald Raymond Gustafson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Phillip Anthony Roberts v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Phillip Anthony Roberts v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jay Michael Ellingson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jay Michael Ellingson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The validity of a plea is a question of law, which is reviewed de novo, and “[t]he defendant bears the burden to establish that his plea was invalid.”
State of Minnesota v. Moses Gum Benjamin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Terence Jerome Wilson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Terence Jerome Wilson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
We will reverse a decision of the postconviction court only if that court abused its discretion.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Moses Gum Benjamin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(“Whether a plea is valid is a question of law which we review de novo.”).
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Joseph McManus Minn. Ct. App. 2014