Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Caulfield, 722 N.W.2d 304.

193 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Teshome Sok Sameru Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Patrick James Modtland Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Kim Marie Tate, Appellant. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
2019) (considering de novo which of two cons titutional tests to apply); (reviewing de novo whet her the admission of evidence violates a defendant’s Confrontation Clause rights).
State of Minnesota v. Luot Tut Makuac Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Quentin Pierre Arnold Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Mark Bradley Zontelli Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota Minn. 2021
See, e.g., State v. Leonard , –63 (Minn. 2020) (court trial on stipulated evidence); (court trial).
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Wayne Garrett Lee Rosebear Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Benjamin Stuckey Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Korie Jermaine Wash Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Percy Leonard French Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Jovan Hargrove Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Ayanna Laverne Coleman Minn. Ct. App. 2019
a t 1 3 6 4 ; State v. Caulfield , -09 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Santiago Guadalupe Ramirez Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Lee Edward Smith, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Brady Edward Speer Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Lopez-Ramos 929 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2019
State v. Lopez-Ramos 929 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2019
2527 , 174 L.Ed.2d 314 (2009), and State v. Caulfield
State of Minnesota v. James Antuan Scott Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Scott Allen Germscheid Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Caulfield , (citing Crawford v. Washington , 541 U.S. 36, 68, 124 S. Ct. 1354, 1374 (2004)).
State v. Sh aka 927 N.W.2d 762 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Sh aka 927 N.W.2d 762 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Caulfield , , 308 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Becker Minn. Ct. App. 2019
” State v. Caulfield , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Mohamud Hussein Ahmed Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The confrontation right “is not absolute” but subject to certain exceptions and forfeitable by “wrongful actions.”
State of Minnesota v. Tavean Greggory McRelly Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Cf. State v. Caulfield , (finding that erroneously admitted lab report impacted verdict because state presented report as definitive ev idence of an element of the of fense).
State of Minnesota v. Robert Allen Oliver Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Sean Perkins Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Devon Larry Green Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Nathan Kenneth Kmetz Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“A constitutional error does not mandate reversal and a new trial if we determine th at the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Caulfield
State v. Schloegl 915 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Schloegl 915 N.W.2d 14 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Caulfield , , 308 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Anton Leo Schloegl, III A17-0898, State of Minnesota, vs. Anton Leo Schloegl, III A17-1301 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Davis 910 N.W.2d 50 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. John Duane Fairbanks Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Davis 910 N.W.2d 50 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Caulfield , , 314 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Darryl Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Gatwech Yiek Thach Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In other words, reversal is required if “the error reasonably could have impacted upon the jury’s decision.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Chim LoVan Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. David Brandyn Earley Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Thomas Russell Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Evidentiary rulings “are within the discretion of the district court and will not be re versed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” State v. Caulfield
State v. Andersen 900 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Andersen 900 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Irlas 888 N.W.2d 709 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Irlas 888 N.W.2d 709 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Rashad Devon Mickelson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Rashad Devon Mickelson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jorge Roman Vasquez Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jorge Roman Vasquez Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Allen Bachman Minn. Ct. App. 2016