Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bruestle v. State, 719 N.W.2d 698.

34 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
10 “[T]here is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotations omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(quotation omitted) (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984)).
State of Minnesota v. Marvel Galvaston Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Marvel Galvaston Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2024
We presume that “counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
There is a presumption that “counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
We presume that “counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (M inn.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[T]here is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” Bruestle v. State , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[T]here is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In general, “there is a strong presumption that counsel ’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” Bruestle v. State , (quotation omitted).
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: L. M. W. and H. E. P., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[T]here is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotations omitted).
Jason Edward Banks, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[T]here is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” Bruestle v. State , (quotations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Byron Lester Goldtooth Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Byron Lester Goldtooth Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“The petitioner bears the burden of proof on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, and there is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotations omitted).
James Donald Dahl v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
James Donald Dahl v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In general, “there is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotation omitted).
Robert Patrick Butters v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Robert Patrick Butters v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Larry Leo Geleneau, Jr. 873 N.W.2d 373 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In general, “there is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance.” (quotation omitted).
Crystal Marie Vodinelich v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Crystal Marie Vodinelich v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jason Donald Matakis v. State of Minnesota 862 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 2015
Jason Donald Matakis v. State of Minnesota 862 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 2015
Otis Elliot Woodson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Otis Elliot Woodson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Steven White v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Steven White v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that a “petitioner bears the burden of proof on an ineffective 9 assistance of counsel claim, and there is a strong presumption that counsel’s performance fell within a wide range of reasonable assistance” and noting that “[t]here are no aff
Shantha Jayapathy v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Shantha Jayapathy v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Matakis v. State 842 N.W.2d 689 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Matakis v. State 842 N.W.2d 689 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-03, 705 (Minn.2006) (affirming denial of postcon-viction petition without evidentiary hearing because petitioner “presented no evidence,” such as “affidavits from unaffiliated defense attorney experts to the effect that counsel’s representation ...
Gail v. State 732 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2007
Gail v. State 732 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2007
State v. McLaughlin 725 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 2007
State v. McLaughlin 725 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 2007