Cited by

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

1039 citing documents.

Grant Lloyd Greenwood v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Billy Joe Coleman Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See Mosley , d at 801 (-300 (Minn. 2006)).
State of Minnesota v. Daniel John Mallet Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Corey David Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. David Earl Peguse Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See, n.6 (Minn. 2006); n.8 (Minn. App. 2019), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Joshua James Allen Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State v. Ramey , -99 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Larry Cregg Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Kim Dale Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Heidi Halvorson Rivers Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. J. Alexander Kueng Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State v. Ramey , n.6 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Olga Nichols Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Dominic Andre Rundles Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Under the modified plain-error standard of review, the burden is on the defendant to demonstrate both that an error occurred and that the error was plain; if the defendant demonstrates that the prosecutor committed plain error, the burden shifts to the state to “demonstrate lack of prejudice; that is, the misconduct did not affect substantial rights.”
State of Minnesota v. Casimir Robert Krithers Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. David Ronald Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Paul Andrew Youngstedt Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Steven LeCuyer Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Roger Lars Robertson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Generson Mauriclo Ruiz-Lainez Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Michael Wendt Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Tarrence Antwon Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Anne Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
5 standard of conduct.” State v. Ramey , (M inn.
Muhamud Ahmed Hirsi v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Deonte Darnell Lawson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Usually this is shown if the error contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” State v. Ramey , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. William Demont White, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Compare State v. Yang , (reviewing objected-to evidence for harmless error) -98 (Minn. 2006) (reviewing for plain error when defendant fails to object at trial).
State of Minnesota v. Richard Lee Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Raheem Ali Beamon Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Prosecutors have an affirmative obligation to ensure that a defendant receives a fair trial, no matter how strong the evidence of guilt.”
State of Minnesota v. Eithan Armani Green Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Portia Renee Glover Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Corey Edward Fisherman Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See State v. Ramey , (holding that appellate courts review unobj ected-to prosecutorial miscon duct under a modified plain- error test).
State of Minnesota v. Ruben Montoya Carbajal Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Dametrius Ratheal Adrian Moore v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Stanley Paul Wenell-Jack Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Ramsey County Thissen, J. Minn. 2020
(holding “that appellate courts should use the plain error doctrine when examining unobjec ted-to prosecutorial misconduct”).
State of Minnesota v. Robert James Yernatich Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Abner Otwoma Momanyi Minn. Ct. App. 2020
A prosecutor has “an affirmative obligation to ensure that a defendant receives a fair trial, no matter how strong the evidence of guilt.” .
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2020
To satisfy this burden, the State must show “that there is no reasonable likelihood that the absence of the misconduct in question would have had a significant effect on the verdict of the jury.” (citati on omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Tomak Zain Zarif Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Daniel Luten Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Lawrence Bernard Nowels Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Lee Andrew Bolton Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Error that Was Plain 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. Zachariah Steven Marczak Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Prosecutors have an affirmative obligation to ensure that a defendant receives a fair trial, no matter how strong the evidence of guilt.”
State of Minnesota v. Su Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Amil Abdi Yonis Minn. Ct. App. 2020
And if a defendant fails to object to procedural error at trial, the “ unobjected-to error can be reviewed only if it constitutes plain error affecting substantial rights.”
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Jessica Jo Huntington Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Richard Theodore Knoll Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Earl Jay Murphy Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Davis Fratzke Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Akeem Banks Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Elizabeth Rose Osterbauer Minn. Ct. App. 2020
n. 4 (Minn. 2006) (“Our decision today leads us to conclude that the Caron two-tiered standard is no longer applicable to cases involving unobjected-to prosecutorial misconduct.