Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Farnsworth, 738 N.W.2d 364.

83 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
We review the voluntariness of a confession de novo “based on all factual findings that are not clearly erroneous.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
To be constitutionally valid, a guilty plea “must be accurate, voluntary, and intelligent.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“A plea is intelligently made if the defendant understands the charges, understands the rights that are waived by pleading guilty, and understands the consequences of the plea.” (), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“A plea is intelligently made if the defendant understands the charges, understands the rights that are waived by pleading guilty, and understands the consequences of the plea.” () , rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
To be constitutionally valid, a guilty plea “must be accurate, voluntary, and intelligent.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(“The traditional viewpoint in Minnesota, as well as elsewhere, has been that a guilty plea by a counseled defendant operates as a waiver of all nonjurisdictional defects, including Fourth Amendment claims.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Farnsworth , (noting that a guilty plea generally operates as a waiver of nonjurisdictional defects, including the admissibility of evidence) ; State v. Johnson , review denied (Minn. May 16, 1988).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
To be constitutionally valid, a guilty plea “must be accurate, voluntary, and intelligent.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Nicholas 924 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Nicholas 924 N.W.2d 286 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Farnsworth , , 372 (Minn. 2007) ("When a guilty plea is entered, it must be accurate, voluntary and intelligent (that is, knowing and understanding).").
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Although this standard is less demanding than the manifest injustice standard, it does not allow a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea ‘for simply any reason.’” Theis, d at 646 ().
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Farnsworth , ; Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Terry Lee West Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Terry Lee West Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A statement is involuntary if the defendant’s “will was overborne at the time he confessed.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Clemente Ramirez-Diaz Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Clemente Ramirez-Diaz Minn. Ct. App. 2017
While the fair-and-just standard “is less demanding than the manifest injustice standard,” a defendant does not have an absolute right to withdraw a plea before sentencing, and may not withdraw a guilty plea “for simply any reason.”
State of Minnesota v. Stacy Lynn Tjoens Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Stacy Lynn Tjoens Minn. Ct. App. 2017
While the fair-and-just standard “is less demanding than the manifest injustice standard,” a defendant does not have an absolute right to withdraw a plea before sentencing, and may not withdraw a guilty plea “for simply any reason.”
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gordon Ranniger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gordon Ranniger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Titus Triston Miguel Mangun Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Titus Triston Miguel Mangun Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jonas David Nelson 886 N.W.2d 505 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jonas David Nelson 886 N.W.2d 505 Minn. 2016
The central question in determining whether a confession is voluntary is whether the defendant’s “will was overborne at the time he confessed.” (quoting Lynumn v. Illinois, 372 U.S. 528, 534 (1963)).
State of Minnesota v. Anthony James Cox 884 N.W.2d 400 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Anthony James Cox 884 N.W.2d 400 Minn. 2016
Monda Thao v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Monda Thao v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Timothy Poorker Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Distinguished State of Minnesota v. Christopher Timothy Poorker Minn. Ct. App. 2016
For that reason, the cases on which he relies, are distinguishable.
State of Minnesota v. Corey Edward Fisherman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Corey Edward Fisherman Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“When a guilty plea is entered, it must be accurate, voluntary, and intelligent (that is, knowing and understanding).”
State of Minnesota v. Adaiah Deontraie Townsend 872 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Adaiah Deontraie Townsend 872 N.W.2d 758 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mackenzie Leigh Meier v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jason DeWayne Kirk Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jason DeWayne Kirk Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Mackenzie Leigh Meier v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Rudolph Gordon Cooper Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Rudolph Gordon Cooper Minn. Ct. App. 2015
2 DECISION Plea withdrawal “A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it,” and “defendants may not withdraw their guilty pleas for simply any reason before a sentence is imposed,”
Patrick Samuel Meszaros v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015