DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Mayhorn, 720 N.W.2d 776.

226 citing documents.

  • State v. Van Keuren 759 N.W.2d 36 Minn. 2008
    at 657 (“Defendant heard everything the state had to offer.”); (“prosecutor noted ...
  • State v. Lindsey 755 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
  • State v. Lindsey 755 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
  • State v. Miller 754 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2008
  • State v. Miller 754 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2008
    See (holding that the evidence was not clear and convincing, in part, because the witness had “no firsthand knowledge” of the incident).
  • State v. McCray 753 N.W.2d 746 Minn. 2008
  • State v. Jones 753 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 2008
  • State v. McCray 753 N.W.2d 746 Minn. 2008
  • State v. Jones 753 N.W.2d 677 Minn. 2008
  • Nunn v. State 753 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 2008
  • Nunn v. State 753 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 2008
    -87 (Minn.2006); (“ ‘The prosecutor should not use arguments calculated to inflame the passions or prejudices of the jury.’ ” (quoting I ABA Standards for Criminal Justice, The Prosecution Function 3-5.8(c) (2d ed.1979))).
  • 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. Lehman 749 N.W.2d 76 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
  • State v. Lehman 749 N.W.2d 76 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
    It can also occur when inadmissible evidence is referred to in an effort to have jurors draw inferences from it, -89 (Minn.2006), or when the prosecutor argues that the defendant had a propensity to commit the charged crimes.
  • State v. Wren 738 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 2007
  • State v. Wren 738 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 2007
    For example, even though Ramey suggests that the applicability of the two-tiered approach of Caron to issues of objected-to misconduct was an open question
  • State v. Davis 735 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 2007
  • State v. Davis 735 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 2007
    See, -91 (Minn.2006); Swanson, d at 658
  • State v. Fields 730 N.W.2d 777 Minn. 2007
  • State v. McArthur 730 N.W.2d 44 Minn. 2007
  • State v. McArthur 730 N.W.2d 44 Minn. 2007
  • State v. Washington 725 N.W.2d 125 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
  • State v. Washington 725 N.W.2d 125 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
  • State v. Ramey 721 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 2006
  • State v. Ramey 721 N.W.2d 294 Minn. 2006
    See, (prosecutor expressed personal opinion about defendant’s guilt, commented on defendant’s failure to call witness and disparaged defendant’s alibi defense, among other improprieties).