Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Penkaty, 708 N.W.2d 185.

169 citing documents.

STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, Appellant, v. Byron David SMITH, Appellant, Respondent 876 N.W.2d 310 Minn. 2016
errors and indiscre.-tions, none of which alone might have been enough to tip the scales, operate to the defendants prejudice by producing a biased [grand] jury,’” ( (internal quotation marks omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. William James Holisky, II Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. William James Holisky, II Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Damien Tito Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Damien Tito Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2015
errors and indiscretions, none of which alone might have been enough to tip the scales, operate to the defendant’s prejudice by producing a biased jury.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Jason DeWayne Kirk Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jason DeWayne Kirk Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A criminal defendant has the right to a meaningful opportunity to present a complete defense.”
State of Minnesota v. Dustin Alan Edsill Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Dustin Alan Edsill Minn. Ct. App. 2015
errors and indiscretions, none of which alone might have been enough to tip the scales, operate to the defendant’s prejudice by producing a biased jury.’” d 185, 200 (Minn. 2006) ().
State of Minnesota v. Thomas James Mitchell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Thomas James Mitchell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Welfare of: P. J. K., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Steven Joseph Mahne Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Steven Joseph Mahne Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Welfare of: P. J. K., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2015
errors and indiscretions, none of which alone might have been enough to tip the scales, operate to the defendant’s prejudice by producing a biased jury.” (alteration in original) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Undra Lewis Harrell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Undra Lewis Harrell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(applying the rule to a homicide case); (noting the admission of reputation evidence in assault cases).
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Duane A. Kennedy, a Minnesota 864 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2015
In re Petition for Disciplinary Action against Duane A. Kennedy, a Minnesota 864 N.W.2d 342 Minn. 2015
(“[A] prosecutor does not ‘represent’ the victim.
State of Minnesota v. Bradley James Richards Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bradley James Richards Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Peter William Warren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Peter William Warren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Trevir Lee Nakomous Siltman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Trevir Lee Nakomous Siltman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Thomas Labarre Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Thomas Labarre Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jerome Deshawn Misters Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jerome Deshawn Misters Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Roberts, 296 Minn. 347, 353 -200 (Minn. 2006) (concluding that such testimony is generally inappropriate to the extent that it gives rise to an impermissible inference of culpability).
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Devens 852 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Devens 852 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 2014
971, 975 (1905); and State v. 9 Penkaty, —to argue that the “home” is defined broadly to include not only one’s living quarters, but also the property connected to and surrounding it.
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Alan Boos Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Alan Boos Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jerry Expose, Jr. 849 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jerry Expose, Jr. 849 N.W.2d 427 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(applying the intentional relinquishment standard to the waiver of a testimonial privilege).
State v. Wenthe 845 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Wenthe 845 N.W.2d 222 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(reversing and remanding for new trial where cumulative effect of evidentiary errors excluding relevant defense evidence and denying requested jury instructions deprived defendant of a fair trial).
State v. Morrow 834 N.W.2d 715 Minn. 2013
State v. Morrow 834 N.W.2d 715 Minn. 2013
“[A] presumption of regularity attaches to a grand jury indictment, and it is a rare case where an indictment is invalidated.”
State v. Martin 823 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Martin 823 N.W.2d 913 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Radke 821 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2012
State v. Radke 821 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2012
“Evidence of prior acts of violence by the victim, in contrast to reputation evidence, is not admissible to show the victim was the aggressor....”
Bobo v. State 820 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 2012
Bobo v. State 820 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 2012
State v. Montermini 819 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Montermini 819 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Because appellant failed to request an instruction on second-degree culpable-negligence manslaughter, he has waived the issue on appeal and “may not argue that the court erred in not sua sponte giving the instruction.”
State v. Beecroft 813 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 2012
State v. Beecroft 813 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 2012
is to guard the rights of the accused as well as to enforce the rights of the public.’ ” ().
State v. Jacobs 802 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 2011

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by