Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Angus v. State, 695 N.W.2d 109.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
C. Relevance and Materiality The fourth requirement is that the evidence be “relevant and material to the state’s case.” (quotation omitted).
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
- State of Minnesota v. Micheal Lee Cocuzzi Minn. Ct. App. 2023
- State of Minnesota v. Micheal Lee Cocuzzi Minn. Ct. App. 2023
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
It is true that the supreme court has said “[w]hether the circumstances of the case raise an inference of discrimination depends in part on the races of the defendant and the victim.” abrogated on other grounds by Rivera v. Illinois, 556 U.S. 148, 129 S. Ct. 1446 (2009).
- State v. Harvey 932 N.W.2d 792 Minn. 2019
-
State v. Harvey
932 N.W.2d 792
Minn. 2019
Cf. Wilson , d at 383 (stating that, at step one of the Batson analysis, "[t]he district court also had to consider potential bias against the State based on [the prospective Juror's] beliefs that in practice the criminal justice system does not work as well as it might and that the United States incarcerates a disproportionate number of African-American men"); see also Angus v. State , , 117 (Minn. 2005) (stating that the defendant's previous peremptory challenge to an African-American juror "w
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The “mere fact that the veniremember subject to the strike is a racial minority does not establish a prima facie case of discrimination.” see also Reiners, d at 831.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Whether the circumstances of the case raise an inference of discrimination depends in part on the races of the defendant and the victim.”
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(“‘Need’ for other -crime evidence is not necessarily the absence of sufficient other evidence to convict .
- State v. Wilson 900 N.W.2d 373 Minn. 2017
-
State v. Wilson
900 N.W.2d 373
Minn. 2017
One surrounding circumstance that Wilson suggests was present was a pattern by the State of'improperly striking all African American prospective jurors, However, in Angus v. State, we concluded that the “existence of a prior strike of a minority, based on race-neutral reasons that were not questioned, does not raise an inference that a subsequent strike of a minority was discriminatory.” (emphasis added).
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(discussing common-la w rules of evidence in conjunction with the Minnesota Rules of Evidence).
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- State of Minnesota v. Ishamel Portwood Middlebrook Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-
State of Minnesota v. Ishamel Portwood Middlebrook
Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Whether the circumstances of the case raise an inference of discrimination depends in part on the races of the defendant and the victim.”
- State of Minnesota v. James Lamar Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. James Lamar Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Maureen Ndidiamaka Onyelobi 879 N.W.2d 334 Minn. 2016
-
State of Minnesota v. Maureen Ndidiamaka Onyelobi
879 N.W.2d 334
Minn. 2016
See, (concluding that the existence of prior strikes of racial minorities based on unchallenged race-neutral reasons or mere concern that “this would be the second African American juror” struck 22 by peremptory challenge was not enough to raise an infere
- State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Bruce Cournoyer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Bruce Cournoyer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Lakeisha Noal Ivy 873 N.W.2d 362 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
State of Minnesota v. Lakeisha Noal Ivy
873 N.W.2d 362
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Whether the circumstances of the case raise an inference of discrimination depends in part on the races of the defendant and the victim.” (finding disproportionate impact where four of seven male jury members were eliminated using peremptory strikes and thus establishing a prima facie case of gender discrimination).
- State of Minnesota v. Demarcus Nasson Chaney Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Demarcus Nasson Chaney Minn. Ct. App. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Trevon Fuller Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
State of Minnesota v. Trevon Fuller
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The party challenging the strike must demonstrate that (1) “the proffered race- neutral reason is not the real reason for the strike” and (2) “the real reason was the race of the veniremember.”
- State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gassoway Minn. Ct. App. 2014
- State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gassoway Minn. Ct. App. 2014
- State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Maurice Galloway Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-
State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Maurice Galloway
Minn. Ct. App. 2014
The prima facie showing analysis also focuses on the racial overtones of the case, specifically, “[w]hether the circumstances of the case raise an inference of discrimination depends in part on the races of the defendant and the victim.” (holding that there were “no racial overtones” for Batson purposes where the defendant and victim were both white).
- State of Minnesota v. Keith Richard Rossberg 851 N.W.2d 609 Minn. 2014
-
State of Minnesota v. Keith Richard Rossberg
851 N.W.2d 609
Minn. 2014
One of the requirements for admitting Spreigl evidence is that the district court “must identify the precise disputed fact to which the Spreigl evidence would be relevant.”
- State of Minnesota v. Katherine Trinka Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
- State of Minnesota v. Katherine Trinka Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
- State v. Seaver 820 N.W.2d 627 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
-
State v. Seaver
820 N.W.2d 627
Minn. Ct. App. 2012
With regard to racial discrimination, “[w]hether the circumstances of the case raise an inference of discrimination depends in part on the races of the defendant and the victim.”
- State v. Fardan 773 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 2009
- State v. Campbell 772 N.W.2d 858 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
-
State v. Campbell
772 N.W.2d 858
Minn. Ct. App. 2009
The party making a Batson challenge establishes a prima facie case of racial discrimination by showing that “(1) one or more members of a racial group have been peremptorily excluded from the jury, and (2) circumstances of the case raise an inference that the exclusion was based on race.”
- State v. Bailey 732 N.W.2d 612 Minn. 2007
- State v. Bailey 732 N.W.2d 612 Minn. 2007
- State v. Dobbins 725 N.W.2d 492 Minn. 2006
-
State v. Dobbins
725 N.W.2d 492
Minn. 2006
See, -15 (Minn.2005); Reiners, d at 831 .
- State v. Gomez 721 N.W.2d 871 Minn. 2006
-
State v. Gomez
721 N.W.2d 871
Minn. 2006
(prospective juror stricken because of expressed reluctance to sit in judgment of others); (venireperson stricken because he might favor police testimony).
- State v. Green 719 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 2006
-
State v. Green
719 N.W.2d 664
Minn. 2006
“[T]he mere fact that the veniremember subject to the strike is a racial minority does not establish a prima facie case of discrimination.”
- State v. Ness 707 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 2006