Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Cao, 788 N.W.2d 710.

90 citing documents.

State v. Patzold 917 N.W.2d 798 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Patzold 917 N.W.2d 798 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Abraham Deng Woi, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Finally, this court determines “whether to address the error to ensure fairness and integrity in judicial proceedings.”
Nathan Thomas Tow-Arnett, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
-16 (Minn. 2010); d 681, 689-90 (Minn. 2002) .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
We may also consider “whether the defendant had an opportunity to (or made efforts to) rebut the improper suggestions.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“An error is prejudicial if there is a reasonable likelihood that the error had a significant effect on the jury’s verdict.” State v. Cao
State v. Parker 901 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 2017
State v. Parker 901 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 2017
An error is “prejudicial” if there is a “reasonable likelihood that the error had a significant effect on the jury’s verdict.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
to find [Roland] guilty.” d at 831; (stating error is plain when it contravenes caselaw).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“An error is plain if it is clear or obvious,” and typically “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotation om itted).
Kenneth Jerome Brunner v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Kenneth Jerome Brunner v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Moreover, “a conviction may be based on a single person’s testimony.”
State of Minnesota v. Kevin John Motz Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kevin John Motz Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. George Barnard Crooks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. George Barnard Crooks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Amanda Lea Peltier 874 N.W.2d 792 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Amanda Lea Peltier 874 N.W.2d 792 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Cedric Chappell, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Cedric Chappell, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“An error is ‘plain’ if it is clear or obvious,” and typically “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
Carlos Heard v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Carlos Heard v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
are satisfied, the [appellate] court determines whether to address the error to ensure fairness and integrity in judicial proceedings.”
State of Minnesota v. Spidel Wayne Browder Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Spidel Wayne Browder Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“Attorneys may 12 reference the law during trial.”).
In the Matter of the Welfare of: J. C. A., Jr., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Michael Tuseth Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In the Matter of the Welfare of: J. C. A., Jr., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
It is well established that “a conviction may be based on a single person’s testimony.” (“We have stated that a conviction can rest on the uncorroborated testimony of a single credible witness.” (quotation omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Michael Tuseth Minn. Ct. App. 2014
are satisfied, the court determines whether to address the error to ensure fairness and integrity in judicial proceedings.”
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Alan Boos Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Alan Boos Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“An error is ‘plain’ if it is clear or obvious,” such as when it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael Arthur Boelz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Michael Arthur Boelz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
are satisfied, the court determines whether to address the error to ensure fairness and integrity in judicial proceedings.”
State v. Weyaus 836 N.W.2d 579 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Weyaus 836 N.W.2d 579 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
“[A] conviction may be based on a single person’s testimony.”
State v. Borg 806 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2011
State v. Vue 797 N.W.2d 5 Minn. 2011
State v. Vue 797 N.W.2d 5 Minn. 2011
State v. Obeta 796 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2011