Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite A.C. Ford v. State, 690 N.W.2d 706.

95 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
279 (Minn. 1998); (discussing defendant’s constitutional right to be present at trial).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Mervel George Jones, III, Appellant Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Mervel George Jones, III, Appellant Minn. Ct. App. 2025
VI, XIV; d 706, 712 (Minn. 2005) (“A defendant’s constitutional right to be present [at trial] is grounded in the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“A defendant’s constitutional right to be present [at trial] is grounded in the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.”
Lashazo Reese, Jr., Minn. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 440, 450 (Minn. 2001).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Igor Pavlovich Albantov, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A defendant’s constitutional right to be present is grounded in the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.” (citing United States v. Gagnon, 470 U.S. 522, 526, 105 S. Ct. 1482, 1484 (1985)).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A defendant’s constitutional right to be present is grounded in the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth 5 Amendment.” Ford v. S tate, .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State v. Petersen 910 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2018
Followed State v. Petersen 910 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2018
Ford v. State , , 712 (Minn. 2005).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
see also State v. Parker, 278 Minn. 53, 55, (stating that “[i]t is fundamental that the right of appeal is purely statutory and that the statutory requirements of filing and service are jurisdiction al” and that “[t]his court has no power to extend the statutory time fo
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.” (holding same).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State of Minnesota v. Joel Patrick Rodriguez 889 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Joel Patrick Rodriguez 889 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Willie Edd Reynolds v. State of Minnesota 888 N.W.2d 125 Minn. 2016
Willie Edd Reynolds v. State of Minnesota 888 N.W.2d 125 Minn. 2016
The State asks us to decide the proper standard of review when examining a district court’s decision to treat a motion under Rule 27.03, subdivision 9, as a petition for postconviction relief under Minn. Stat. 4
Ronald Aaron McCord v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ronald Aaron McCord v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 706, 712 (Minn. 2005).
State of Minnesota v. Byron Lester Goldtooth Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Byron Lester Goldtooth Minn. Ct. App. 2016
e reference to March 6, 2014, was a clerical error and that the discovery motion was argued in open court on March 10, 2014, in Goldtooth’s presence.1 A defendant in a criminal proceeding has a constitutional right under the Confrontation Clause of the Sixth Amendment and the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment to be present “at all critical stages of trial.” see also United v. Gagnon, 470 U.S. 522, 526, 105 S. Ct. 1482, 1484 (1985).
State of Minnesota v. Armando DeLaCruz, Jr. 884 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Armando DeLaCruz, Jr. 884 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Craig Matthew Hohenwald v. State of Minnesota 875 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 2016
Craig Matthew Hohenwald v. State of Minnesota 875 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael Patrick Morin Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael Patrick Morin Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State of Minnesota v. Alton Dominique Finch 865 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Alton Dominique Finch 865 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2015
The interpretation of those rules “is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State of Minnesota v. Zacharie Allen Stankey Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Zacharie Allen Stankey Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State of Minnesota v. Josue Robles Fraga 864 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Josue Robles Fraga 864 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Maker Galuak Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Maker Galuak Minn. Ct. App. 2015
DECISION “The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Lee Myhre Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Lee Myhre Minn. Ct. App. 2015
P. 26.01 “The interpretation of the rules of criminal procedure is a question of law subject to de novo review.”
State of Minnesota v. Wayne Keith Parmenter Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Wayne Keith Parmenter Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jose Socorro Ortiz v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Followed Jose Socorro Ortiz v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jesus Ivan Torres-Lopez Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jesus Ivan Torres-Lopez Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Fabian Charles Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Fabian Charles Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2014