Cited by

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

1039 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Anthony John Tavarez Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Kristopher Daniel Schwabe Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Lorenzo Thomas Sims Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Gerald Floyd Crain, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Michael Arthur Rock Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Carlos Rosas Minn. Ct. App. 2023
An error is “plain if it is ‘clear’ or ‘obvious,’ which is typically established ‘if the error contravenes case law, a rule, or standard of conduct.’” ().
Stephen Carl Allwine, Minn. 2023
State of Minnesota v. William Joseph Young Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Arlando Demtrious Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(d 294, 302 (Minn. 2006)).
State of Minnesota v. Edbin Jose Coreas Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Emilio Ozornia Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In the Matter of Katie Ann Pyka On Behalf Of Minor Children v. Steven David Pyka Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(explaining, in a criminal trial context, that the contemporaneous-objection requirement encourages trial participants to seek a fair and accurate trial the first time around).
State of Minnesota v. Gordy Lee Burkhart Minn. Ct. App. 2023
We review claims of unobjected-to prosecutorial misconduct under a modified plain -error standard, considering whether there is “(1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) affects substantial rights.”
State of Minnesota v. David NMN Alonzo Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 294, 302 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Kenyatta Devine Buckles Minn. Ct. App. 2023
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Alexander James Mueller Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State v. Ramey , -300 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Raytavien Rashad Richardson Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Derek Michael Chauvin Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. David Darnell Jones, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Nathanael John Prevo Minn. Ct. App. 2023
An error is plain if it 6 “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Keith Allen Armstrong Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“[U]nobjected-to prosecutorial misconduct can be reviewed only if it constitutes plain error affecting substantial rights.”
State of Minnesota v. Jeramy John Wharton Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Albert Schally Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Mark Scott Hendrickson Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Zakarie Farah Hassan Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Abdirahin Omar Ali Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Kissie Marie Haynes Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Bobby Dawkins, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“Ordinarily, [a party’s] failure to object to an error at trial forfeits appellate review.”
State of Minnesota v. Richard James Graf Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Dak Luk Ret Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Gail Lynn Schauer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(stating when defendant fails to object at trial, they generally forfeit consideration of prosecutorial misconduct on appeal, but reviewing court can still address the misconduct under the plain-error doctrine).
State of Minnesota v. Franchel Delmar Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Claims of unobjected- to prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed pursuant to a modified-plain-error standard which first requires the defendant to demonstrate “that the prosecutor’s conduct constitutes an error that is plain,” and then the burden shifts “to the state to demonstrate lack of prejudice.”
State of Minnesota v. Kyle James Itkonen Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Dejahn Akeem Wiley-Hunt Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. David James Whitebird, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Melvin Charles Kingbird Minn. Ct. App. 2022
We review such claims under a modified plain-error standard, considering whether there is “(1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) affects substantial rights.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael Douglas Capshaw Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Ryan Edward Pulley Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Corrie Raeann Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Corey Lynden Stone Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Kevin John LeClair Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“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.’” d 782, 787 (Minn. 2017) ().
State of Minnesota v. Noe Roushbel Gonzalez Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Leonte Laray High Town Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Dontae Deshaun White Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Kymone Leandre Scott Minn. Ct. App. 2022
8 (Minn. 2016); (extending the plain-error doctrine to unobjected -to claims of prosecutorial misconduct).
State of Minnesota v. Christian Portillo Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Jerimiah Micheal McFee Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Gary Alvin Paananen Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Carlos Aaron Jimenez, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Steven John Moore Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(“On appeal, an unobjected-to error can be reviewed only if it constitutes plain error affecting substantial rights.”).