Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Kelley, 734 N.W.2d 689.

20 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
James Thomas Miller, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
at 853 (“Intent may be inferred from all the facts and circumstances, such as exhibitions of anger, threats, gestures and other conduct.”); see also 4A Minnesota Practice, CIVJIG 60.20 (2014) (setting out elements of civil assault); rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
Overruled State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Appellant counters that Cogger is no longer good law because it (1) has been superseded by statute and (2) relied on caselaw that has been overruled, rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Kelley , (“[CRIMJIGS] merely provide guidelines and are not mandatory rules; jury instruction guides are instructive, but not precedential or binding on this court.”), review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
given by the district court are the functional equivalent of the model jury instruction, which has been found to state the correct legal standard, and that the district court did not abuse its discretion in its instruction on constructive possession.4 However, we caution the district court that, while the model jury instructions are guidelines and are not mandatory rules, In several unpublished opinions this court has conside red and upheld the use of similar jury instructions as functional equi
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Charles Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Charles Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Of course, “[CRIMJIGS] merely provide guidelines and are not mandatory rules; jury instruction guides are instructive, but not precedential or binding on this court,” review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Raymond Struzyk 869 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Raymond Struzyk 869 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 2015
The district court denied Struzyk’s requested instructions, -95 (Minn.App.2007).
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Alan Pourrier Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Alan Pourrier Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But “the jury instruction guides merely provide guidelines and are not mandatory rules.” review denied (Minn. Sept.
State v. Broten 836 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Broten 836 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
“We are ‘to read and construe a statute as a whole and must interpret each section in light of the surrounding sections to avoid conflicting interpretations.’ ” (Minn.App.
State v. Watkins 820 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Watkins 820 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
But the jury instruction guides are “not precedential or binding.” review denied (Minn. Sept.
State v. Gunderson 812 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Gunderson 812 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
However, the CRIMJIGs are “not precedential or binding.”
State v. Cogger 802 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Cogger 802 N.W.2d 407 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
1; -94 (Minn.App.2007), review denied (Minn. Sept.