DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Carrillo v. Fabian, 701 N.W.2d 763.

63 citing documents.

  • State v. LeDOUX 770 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 2009
  • Hines v. Fabian 764 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
  • Hines v. Fabian 764 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
    Prison inmates are entitled to due-process protection, and prison officials “must provide inmates with an appropriate level of due process before they are deprived of a protected liberty interest.”
  • C.O. v. Doe 757 N.W.2d 343 Minn. 2008
  • C.O. v. Doe 757 N.W.2d 343 Minn. 2008
    (citing Morrissey v. Brewer, 408 U.S. 471, 481 , 92 S.Ct.
  • State Ex Rel. Marlowe v. Fabian 755 N.W.2d 792 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
  • State Ex Rel. Marlowe v. Fabian 755 N.W.2d 792 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
    (holding that DOC hearing officer must find by preponderance of evidence that offender committed disciplinary offense before date of supervised release can be extended).
  • Johnson v. Fabian 735 N.W.2d 295 Minn. 2007
  • Overruled Johnson v. Fabian 735 N.W.2d 295 Minn. 2007
    The inmates in the cases before us argue that after this court’s and the Supreme Court’s decision in McKune v. Lile, 536 U.S. 24 , 122 S.Ct.
  • Johnson v. Fabian 711 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
  • Johnson v. Fabian 711 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
    Appellant also argues that the hearing officer used the “some evidence”
  • In Re the Welfare of R. V. 702 N.W.2d 294 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
  • In Re the Welfare of R. V. 702 N.W.2d 294 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
    807, 823 , 127 L.Ed.2d 114 (1994) (stating that whether the demands of due process are satisfied solely by compliance with procedural formalities is a question of law); , 2005 WL 1773989, at *3 (Minn. July 28, 2005) (“Whether due process is required in a particular case is a question of law, which we review de novo.”).