Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State Ex Rel. Marlowe v. Fabian, 755 N.W.2d 792.

21 citing documents.

Anthony B Graham v. Marie Houston, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Michael Anthony Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2025
see also Minn. Stat. §§ 243.05, subds.
State of Minnesota v. Jaye William Snyder Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jaye William Snyder Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jaye William Snyder Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(“By statute, the [department of corrections] must release offenders after they serve their term of imprisonment an d must supervise offenders during their period of supervised release.”) ; see also Minn. Stat. §§ 244.101, subds.
State of Minnesota, ex rel. Gumdel Nygare Gilo v. Paul Schnell, Commissioner of Corrections Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Minn. 2021
State of Minnesota ex rel. Gerald Browneagle v. Paul Schnell, Commissioner of Corrections Minn. Ct. App. 2021
the habeas petitioner, a risk-level-II sex offender, was placed on ISR after serving two-thirds of his sentence.
State of Minnesota, ex rel. Antwone Ford, Minn. 2019
Marlowe v. Fabian , , the district court properly granted the writ and imposed an appropriate remedy.
In re the Marriage of: Beth Ann Bersaw v. Richard George Bersaw Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 792, 794 (Minn. App. 2008).
State of Minnesota, ex rel. Antwone Ford v. Tom Roy, Commissioner of Corrections Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, ex rel., Joshua Sather v. Tom Roy, Commissioner of Corrections Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, ex rel., Arturo Martinez v. Tom Roy, Commissioner of Corrections Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-95 (Minn. App. 2008) (distinguishing an inmate’s liber ty interest in his initial supervised-release date from an inmate’s continuing confinement because he cannot find approved housing).
In the Matter of: Danielle Ann Schanze v. Daniel Frederick Schanze Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of: Danielle Ann Schanze v. Daniel Frederick Schanze Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Duncan v. Roy 830 N.W.2d 48 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Duncan v. Roy 830 N.W.2d 48 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
Marlowe v. Fabian, *52 for support.
Cannon v. Minneapolis Police Department 783 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Cannon v. Minneapolis Police Department 783 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Christopher v. Windom Area School Board 781 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Christopher v. Windom Area School Board 781 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
893, 902 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976); (“In general, due process requires notice and a meaningful opportunity to be heard before a fair and impartial decisionmaker.”).