Cited by

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

167 citing documents.

State v. Grigsby 806 N.W.2d 101 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
“This right necessarily includes the ability to present the defendant’s version of the facts through witness testimony.”
State v. Graham 764 N.W.2d 340 Minn. 2009
State v. Graham 764 N.W.2d 340 Minn. 2009
(citing U.S. Const, amend.
State v. Miller 754 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2008
State v. Miller 754 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2008
State v. Jones 753 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 2008
State v. Jones 753 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 2008
this court concluded that, when the trial record clearly demonstrated, through statements made on the record by defense counsel, that the defendant did not object to his wife’s testimony based on defense counsel’s mistaken belief that under the special circumstances of the case the defendant did not
State v. Ali 752 N.W.2d 98 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Ali 752 N.W.2d 98 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Haynes 725 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 2007
State v. Haynes 725 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 2007
State v. Dobbins 725 N.W.2d 492 Minn. 2006
State v. Dobbins 725 N.W.2d 492 Minn. 2006
In addition, “[e]vidence that a defendant exercised his rights to remain silent or to have an attorney present for questioning is generally inadmissible at trial.” ().
State v. Ramey 721 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 2006
State v. Ramey 721 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 2006
This is so because, as we have repeatedly said, a prosecutor “is a minister of justice whose obligation is to guard the rights of the accused as well as to enforce the rights of the public.” (citations omitted)
State v. Goodloe 718 N.W.2d 413 Minn. 2006
State v. Goodloe 718 N.W.2d 413 Minn. 2006
State v. *423 Penkaty, Dahlin, d at 597-98 .