Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Clark, 722 N.W.2d 460.
- State v. Gunderson 812 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
- State v. Gunderson 812 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
- State v. Sailee 792 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
-
State v. Sailee
792 N.W.2d 90
Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(holding that serious allegations prompt the need for “searching inquiry” by the district court).
- State v. Jones 772 N.W.2d 496 Minn. 2009
-
State v. Jones
772 N.W.2d 496
Minn. 2009
Appointing advisory or standby counsel is a “procedural matter for judicial determination,” and Jones does not have “a constitutional right to advisory counsel.” -67 (Minn.2006).
- Holt v. State 772 N.W.2d 470 Minn. 2009
-
Holt v. State
772 N.W.2d 470
Minn. 2009
Their primary purposes are “ensuring the fairness of the criminal justice process, promoting judicial efficiency, and preserving the appearance of judicial impartiality.” (citing Minn. R.Crim.
- State v. Paige 765 N.W.2d 134 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
-
State v. Paige
765 N.W.2d 134
Minn. Ct. App. 2009
(stating that “[a] court will grant [a defendant’s] request for substitute counsel only if exceptional circumstances exist and the demand is timely and reasonably made”) (quotation omitted), aff'd
- State v. Jones 755 N.W.2d 341 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
- State v. Jones 755 N.W.2d 341 Minn. Ct. App. 2008