DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Fields v. State, 733 N.W.2d 465.

83 citing documents.

  • Izell Wright Robinson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
    (“When an ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim is based on appellate counsel’s failure to raise an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim, the appellant must first show that trial counsel was ineffective.”).
  • Willie James Patterson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
  • Willie James Patterson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
    A criminal defendant is entitled to relief for ineffective assistance of counsel if he proves that the “representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness,” and that “there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052 (1984)).
  • Luis Esteban Pliego Cortes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
  • Luis Esteban Pliego Cortes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
    First, the defendant must 4 show that his or her counsel’s representation “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” (quotation omitted).
  • State of Minnesota v. Jay Dean Uldrych Minn. Ct. App. 2015
  • State of Minnesota v. Jay Dean Uldrych Minn. Ct. App. 2015
    First, we consider whether counsel’s representation “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” (quotation omitted).
  • State of Minnesota v. Ronald Matthew Quiceno Minn. Ct. App. 2015
  • State of Minnesota v. Ronald Matthew Quiceno Minn. Ct. App. 2015
    First, the defendant must show that his or her counsel’s representation “fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.” (quotation omitted).
  • Steven White v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
  • Steven White v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
    “When an ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim is based on appellate counsel’s failure to raise an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim, the appellant must first show that trial counsel was ineffective.”
  • Frank Duane Lussier v. State of Minnesota 853 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2014
  • Frank Duane Lussier v. State of Minnesota 853 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2014
  • Willie James Patterson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
  • Willie James Patterson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
  • Bobo v. State 820 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 2012
  • Bobo v. State 820 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 2012
    Under the first prong of the Strickland test, a defendant must show counsel’s representation “ ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness.’ ” (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88 , 104 S.Ct.
  • Reed v. State 793 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 2010
  • Reed v. State 793 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 2010
    B. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel— Merits To have a valid claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, Reed must show “that counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness,” and “that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” (internal quotation marks omitted) (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 , 104 S.Ct.
  • Evans v. State 788 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2010
  • Evans v. State 788 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2010
    We have said, “When an ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim is based on appellate counsel’s failure to raise an ineffective assistance of trial counsel claim, the [petitioner] must first show that trial counsel was ineffective.”
  • Wright v. State 765 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 2009
  • Wright v. State 765 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Miller 754 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2008
  • State v. Miller 754 N.W.2d 686 Minn. 2008
    The first part of this test requires that the petitioner prove that “counsel’s representation fell *709 below an objective standard of reasonableness.” (quoting Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687-88 , 104 S.Ct.
  • Arredondo v. State 754 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 2008
  • Arredondo v. State 754 N.W.2d 566 Minn. 2008
    sel claim is properly before us. In order to succeed on an ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim, Arredondo must show that his appellate “ ‘counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’ ” and that “ ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’ ” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694 , 104 S.Ct.
  • Brocks v. State 753 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 2008
  • Brocks v. State 753 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 2008
    But to prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel grounded on a claim that trial counsel was ineffective, Brocks “must first show that trial counsel was ineffective.”
  • Nunn v. State 753 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 2008
  • Nunn v. State 753 N.W.2d 657 Minn. 2008
    In order to succeed on an ineffective assistance of counsel claim, a petitioner must prove two elements: (1) “ ‘counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness,’ ” and (2) “ ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the results of the proceeding would have been different.’ ” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694 , 104 S.Ct.
  • Cooper v. State 745 N.W.2d 188 Minn. 2008
  • Cooper v. State 745 N.W.2d 188 Minn. 2008