Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Lopez, 778 N.W.2d 700.

91 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Alec Evert Adolfson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Alec Evert Adolfson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jessica Corinne Anich Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jessica Corinne Anich Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-04 (Minn. 2010) (“A motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause should be denied where the facts appearing in the record, including reliable hearsay, would preclude the granting of a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal if proved at trial.
State of Minnesota v. Sergey Alekseyevich Porada Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Sergey Alekseyevich Porada Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Desmon Demond Burks v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Desmon Demond Burks v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(“The ‘same set of circumstances’ provision in the statute requires registration where the same general group of facts gives rise to both the conviction offense and the charged predatory offense.”).
State of Minnesota v. Livinus Ndubisi Ezeobi Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Livinus Ndubisi Ezeobi Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(reviewing de novo whether defendant was required to register as predatory offender); d 462, 464 (Minn. App. 2012) (“Because resolution of [the issue of whether a defendant was required to register as a predatory offender] is based on interpretation of the offender- r
Danny Lee Zinski v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Danny Lee Zinski v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“Minnesota Statutes § 243.166 mandates that a person ‘shall register’ as a predatory offender.”).
In the Matter of the Welfare of: D. A. K., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Welfare of: D. A. K., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Richard Handsome Carter Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Richard Handsome Carter Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Rickford Rehmann Munger 858 N.W.2d 814 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Rickford Rehmann Munger 858 N.W.2d 814 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael James Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Carl Antonio Wilks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Michael James Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Carl Antonio Wilks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
The offenses must be “sufficiently linked in time, location, people and events.”
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Michael Jepson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Michael Jepson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Ivan Ray Vaughan v. Wade Setter, Superintendant, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension in his official capacity Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Ivan Ray Vaughan v. Wade Setter, Superintendant, Minnesota Bureau of Criminal Apprehension in his official capacity Minn. Ct. App. 2014
And the legislature amended the statute two years later to include not only those convicted of predatory offenses but also those charged with a predatory offense and convicted of an offense arising out of the same circumstances to “ensure that true predatory offenders cannot plead out of the registration requirements.”
State v. Haukos 847 N.W.2d 270 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Haukos 847 N.W.2d 270 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
the supreme court held that the purpose of Minnesota’s sex-offender-registration statute is “to ensure that true predatory offenders cannot plead out of the registration requirements,” d at 704 , not to vest prosecutors with unchecked authority to require defendants to register as sex offenders.
State v. Wood 845 N.W.2d 239 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Wood 845 N.W.2d 239 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“A motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause should be denied where the facts appearing in the record, including reliable hearsay, would preclude the granting of a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal if proved at trial.” -04 (Minn.2010) (quotation omitted).
State v. Clarkin 817 N.W.2d 678 Minn. 2012
In re the Welfare of M.L.M. 813 N.W.2d 26 Minn. 2012
State v. Johnson 813 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2012
State v. Johnson 813 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2012
P. 2.01, 2.02; ("A person may be charged with a crime only where there is probable cause to believe that the person is guilty....
State v. BRIARD 784 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. BRIARD 784 N.W.2d 421 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
ertification is to submit important or doubtful questions of law and “not the general question of whether evidence shows or proves defendant to be guilty or innocent, which is a mixed question of fact and law to be decided by the jury, aided by the advice of the [district court] judge as to the law of the case.” State v. Moller, 276 Minn. 185, 187 , (“A person may be charged with a crime only where there is probable cause to believe that the person is guilty — that is, where facts have been subm
State v. Knoch 781 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Enoch 781 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Enoch 781 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Indeed, the supreme court recently stated, “A motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause should be denied where ‘the facts appearing in the record, including reliable hearsay, would preclude the granting of a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal if proved at trial.’ ” -04 (Minn.2010) (quoting *178 Florence , 306 Minn, at 459, d at 903 ).
State v. Knoch 781 N.W.2d 170 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Indeed, the supreme court recently stated, "A motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause should be denied where `the facts appearing in the record, including reliable hearsay, would preclude the granting of a motion for a directed verdict of acquittal if proved at trial.'" -04 (Minn.2010) (quoting *178 Florence, 306 Minn. at 459 , d at 903 ).

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by