Cited by

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

1039 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Derrick Lee Riddle Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. John Lee Bartel Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Hassan Farth Muse Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Mario Antonio Burciaga Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Darrell Wayne Brownbull, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“On appeal, an unobjected -to error can be reviewed only if it constitutes plain error affecting substantial rights.” (citing Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Marquise Davonte Cox Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Ramey , -98 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. James Robert Bazoff Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Cassie Ann Garza Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Because Garza did not object at trial, we consider whether there is “(1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) affects substantial rights.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael Scott Hansen Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Tamico Annette Reed Minn. Ct. App. 2019
As Reed did not object at trial, this court applies a modified plain -error test to the alleged misconduct and considers whether there is “(1) error, (2) that is plain, and (3) affects substantial rights.” State v. Ramey
State of Minnesota v. Alfonso Quiroz Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Because appellant did not object at trial, we apply the modified plain-error test and consider whether there is “ (1) error, (2 ) that is plain, and (3) affects substantial rights.” 1
State of Minnesota v. Myron Alexander Bruss Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Hussen Hassan Hussen Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Lindsey Samuel Pearson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Victor Issac Wion Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Joel Allen Wortman Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Bradly James Haddock Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Thomas Price Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 294, 297-300 (Minn. 2006); see State v. Parker , -26 (Minn. 2017) (reiterating the standard).
State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Alonzo Jefferson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Gerald James Risk Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Eli Jovanny Masani Minn. Ct. App. 2019
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Jerwulu D. Wright Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Fransion Jenkins, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Michael Anthony Pitts Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Deandre Johnson, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 294, 300 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Desean Howard Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota (A18-1579) (A18-1569) v. William Cornell Walker (A18-1569) (A18-1579) Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 294, 302 (Minn. 2006).
Ernesto Torres Garcia v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Simon Benjamin Danquah Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Trajion Terrance Conner Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Lee Vredenburg Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Prosecutorial error does not affect 11 a defendant’s substantial rights when “there is no reasonable likelihood that the absence of the misconduct in question would have a significant effect on the verdict of the jury.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Todd Curtis Myers Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Phillip Michael Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Victor Ciriaco-Martinez Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Kaylen Demond Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The state relies most heavily on State v. Ramey , -99 (Minn. 2006), for the proposition that a timely objection is required to preserve an assertion of error.
State of Minnesota v. Brady Edward Speer Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(noting it has “not yet decided whether this two -tiered approach” remains viable) ; State v. Ramey , n.4 (Minn. 2006) (“We leave for another day the question of whether the .
State of Minnesota v. Abdiqadar Salah Kasim Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. German 929 N.W.2d 466 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. German 929 N.W.2d 466 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Ramey , , 302 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Soyan Mohamed-Rashid Abdirahman Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“An error is plain if it was clear or obvious.” State v. Ramey , (quotations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Joseph James Nolan Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
State v. Zinski 927 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2019
State v. Zinski 927 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2019
" State v. Hayes , , 555 (Minn. 2013) (quoting State v. Ramey , , 302 (Minn. 2006) ).
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
See State v. Ramey , , 302 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Abdiaziz Ali Adan Minn. Ct. App. 2019
David Wayne Benolt v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Lamar Darcell Coffee Minn. Ct. App. 2019
An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Tyler Lee Gerard Glaser Minn. Ct. App. 2019
n.4 (Minn. 2006) (“We leave for another day the question of whether the Caron two-tiered approach should continue to apply to cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct.”).