Cited by

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

1028 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. David Edward Palmer Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Brian-Will Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
An error is plain if it is “clear” or “obvious,” meaning that it “contravenes caselaw, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. David Edward Palmer Minn. Ct. App. 2014
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael Arthur Boelz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Enamidem Celestine Okon Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Enamidem Celestine Okon Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Trokon Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Dontrell Dyna Flowers Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Jeremy John Huey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Trokon Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that defendant must demonstrate that error occurred and that error was plain, but prosecution must show lack of prejudice).
Jeremy John Huey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that defendant must demonstrate that error occurred and that error was plain, but prosecution must show lack of prejudice).
State of Minnesota v. Dontrell Dyna Flowers Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Alvin Lee Fitzgerald, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Simeon Laderick Sharp Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Steven Anthony Ehlen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Corey Lee Melde Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Alvin Lee Fitzgerald, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Steven Anthony Ehlen Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Simeon Laderick Sharp Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Because Sharp did not object to the prosecutor’s closing argument, we review Sharp’s
State of Minnesota v. Corey Lee Melde Minn. Ct. App. 2014
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Katherine Trinka Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Mang Yang Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Katherine Trinka Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“On appeal, an unobjected-to error can be reviewed only if it constitutes plain error affecting substantial rights.”
State of Minnesota v. Mang Yang Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Under this standard, “there must be (1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) affects substantial rights.”
State v. Vang 847 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 2014
State v. Vang 847 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 2014
State v. Wenthe 845 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Wenthe 845 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
An error is plain “if the error contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
Gulbertson v. State 843 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 2014
Gulbertson v. State 843 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 2014
State v. Salyers 842 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Salyers 842 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Tayari-Garrett 841 N.W.2d 644 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Tayari-Garrett 841 N.W.2d 644 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
It is not clear that this two-tiered approach for ob-jeeted-to prosecutorial misconduct announced in State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127-28 , which adopted a modified plain-error analysis for unobjected-to pros-ecutorial misconduct.
Poppler v. Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Ass'n 834 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Poppler v. Wright Hennepin Cooperative Electric Ass'n 834 N.W.2d 527 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
An error is plain if it is clear or obvious, and an error is clear or obvious if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct,”
State v. Kelley 832 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Kelley 832 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
-05 (Minn.2006) (Gildea, C.J., concurring).
State v. Hayes 831 N.W.2d 546 Minn. 2013
State v. Munt 831 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2013
State v. Hayes 831 N.W.2d 546 Minn. 2013
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State v. Munt 831 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2013
State v. Hokanson 821 N.W.2d 340 Minn. 2012
State v. Hokanson 821 N.W.2d 340 Minn. 2012
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State v. Radke 821 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2012
State v. Radke 821 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2012
State v. Watkins 820 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Watkins 820 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
B. Plain error An error is plain if it is clear or obvious, meaning that it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotations omitted).
State v. Smith 819 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. McCauley 820 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2012