Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294.

1039 citing documents.

State v. Ivy 902 N.W.2d 652 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. William Mcsho Hall, II Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Steven Bernard Edwards Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Ramey , –300 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Oji Konata Markham Minn. Ct. App. 2017
or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael Anthony Llona Minn. Ct. App. 2017
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a st andard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Grant Lloyd Greenwood Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Quenton Tyrone Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Devante Lemuel Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Bernard Neal Minn. Ct. App. 2017
appeal even if it was not brought to the trial court’s attention.”); State v. Ramey , (“On appeal, an unobjected-to error can be reviewed only if it constitutes plain error affecting substantial 12 rights.”).
State v. Smith 901 N.W.2d 657 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Smith 901 N.W.2d 657 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“An error is plain if it was clear or obvious,” and an error is usually clear or obvious if it “contravenes case law, a rule or a standard of conduct.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Christian David-Robert Wille Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Sean Fitzgerald Pozzi Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Usually this is shown if the error contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” d 294, 302 (Minn. 2006) (citations and quotations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Deangelas Demoyne Cook Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Prosecutorial Misconduct “[A]ppellate courts should use the plain error doctrine when examining unobjected- to prosecutorial misconduct.” State v. Ramey
State of Minnesota v. Jason David Hoversten Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Darrol Allen Shepersky Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Galgalo Jarso Hache Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Ramey , 0 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Christina Schmiedt Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. David Alexander Schill, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Solomon Washington McIntyde Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Gerry Thomas Cardinal Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Michael Robert Weldon Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Fernell Damon Nickson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Rickey Maddox Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Trevor Joseph Steven Kottke Minn. Ct. App. 2017
abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey , 9 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Joseph Hodapp Minn. Ct. App. 2017
[or it] contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” .
State of Minnesota v. Samuel Haimah Boimah Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Generally, an error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State v. Harris 895 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 2017
State v. Harris 895 N.W.2d 592 Minn. 2017
The dissent also argues that previously we have been willing to overrule our standards of review, *599 (Minn. 2006)
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Lee Brock Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“An error is plain if it was ‘clear’ or ‘obvious.’” d 294, 302 (Minn. 2006) (quot ation omitted).
State v. Webster 894 N.W.2d 782 Minn. 2017
State v. Webster 894 N.W.2d 782 Minn. 2017
An error is plain if it is “clear” or “obvious,” which is typically established “if the error contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Justin Allen Hanson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 294, 302 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Romego Jewel Young Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Dalmar Hassan Dhimbil Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. DeSean Lamont Thomas Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Douglas Frederick Gratz Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Brittany Ann Vacko Minn. Ct. App. 2017
P. 31.02; State v. Ramey , .
State of Minnesota v. Travis Clay Andersen Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. David Lee Blanshan Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Andre Lorenzo Watts Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Sarar Chan Chhoy Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Tyrone Levar Price Minn. Ct. App. 2017
The state must show “there is no reasonable likelihood that the absence of the misconduct in question would have had a significant e ffect on the verdict of the jury.” (quotati ons omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Sergio Javier Saldana-Viryen Minn. Ct. App. 2017
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” State v. Ramey , 02 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Chris Harry McIntosh Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Ian Ryo Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Ian Ryo Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Chris Harry McIntosh Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Bashir Abdullahi Farah Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Mohamed Adel Alwan Minn. Ct. App. 2017

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by