DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Reese, 692 N.W.2d 736.

66 citing documents.

  • State v. Hansen 805 N.W.2d 915 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
  • State v. Hansen 805 N.W.2d 915 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
    at 772 ; (stating that reviewing court interprets a criminal statute “[b]ased on the plain language of the statute and our previous decisions interpreting the statute”).
  • State v. Edstrom 792 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
  • State v. Edstrom 792 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
  • State v. Anderson 789 N.W.2d 227 Minn. 2010
  • State v. Anderson 789 N.W.2d 227 Minn. 2010
  • State v. Evans 756 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 2008
  • State v. Evans 756 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 2008
  • State v. Morales-Mulato 744 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
  • State v. Morales-Mulato 744 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
    at 791 () (holding that exclusion of an expert witness’s opinion that a victim’s drug use affected her ability to give reliable testimony was not an abuse of discretion).
  • State v. Cram 718 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 2006
  • State v. Cram 718 N.W.2d 898 Minn. 2006
    Cram is correct to note that we have recognized that privileges “ ‘sometimes must give way to the defendant’s right to confront his accusers.’ ” ().
  • State v. Wembley 712 N.W.2d 783 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
  • State v. Wembley 712 N.W.2d 783 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
    The fundamental rule is that “assessment of witness credibility is a jury function.”
  • State v. Pendleton 706 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 2005
  • State v. Pendleton 706 N.W.2d 500 Minn. 2005