Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Hersi, 763 N.W.2d 339.

18 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Although we have concluded above that there is sufficient direct evidence to establish that Gills made a call for emergency police service because she expressed an urgent need for assistance from police, “the fact that emergency service or assistance is requested does not mean that an emergency actually exists.” (citing Minn. Stat. § 609.78, subd.
In the Matter of the Welfare of: N. K. D., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2024
3(a) (2022) ; -44 (Minn. App. 2009) (holding that one element of interference with an emergency call is “that an emergency existed” at the time the call is placed).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Generally, an error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Generally, plain error is shown if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” d 339, 344 (Minn. App. 2009) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A call is not an emergency call unless ‘an emergency exists.’” State v. Hersi , (M inn.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Berry Alan Willis, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
The district court must “clearly instruct the jury on exactly what it is they must decide.” (citing Rosillo v. State , ).
Brian Allen Barthel, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Id.; -44 (Minn. App. 2009).
State of Minnesota v. Damien Kent Hallmon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Damien Kent Hallmon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(remanding for new trial after concluding jury was improperly instructed, but state presented sufficient evidence to convict).
State of Minnesota v. Staci Jo Montgomery Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Staci Jo Montgomery Minn. Ct. App. 2015
necessary to make the actor’s conduct criminal)
State v. McCauley 820 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. McCauley 820 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
See 10 Minnesota Practice, CRIMJIG 12.105 (2010); (stating that a jury instruction was erroneous where it omitted a stated element of the statute: “the jury instructions did not fairly and adequately explain the law to the jury, and the instruction was erroneous”).
State v. Montermini 819 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Montermini 819 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
(stating that error is usually plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct”).
State v. Brandes 781 N.W.2d 603 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Brandes 781 N.W.2d 603 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
3; (“[A] call is not an emergency call unless an emergency exists.” (quotation omitted)).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by