Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Rickert v. State, 795 N.W.2d 236.

82 citing documents.

Phillip Anthony Roberts v. State of Minnesota 856 N.W.2d 287 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
In Rickert v. State, the supreme court considered “the degree of fault assigned to the party asserting the interests- of-justice claim.”
State of Minnesota v. Brian Jeffrey Copeland Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Brian Jeffrey Copeland Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(“Like a verdict of a jury[, a guilty plea] is conclusive.
State v. A.S.E. 835 N.W.2d 513 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. A.S.E. 835 N.W.2d 513 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
(“It is well established that a defendant, by [her] plea of guilty, in effect judicially admits the allegations contained in the complaint.” (quotation omitted)).
State v. Rohan 834 N.W.2d 223 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Rohan 834 N.W.2d 223 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
(“Generally, we will not address a constitutional issue if there is another basis upon which the case can be decided.”).
Dickhoff ex rel. Dickhoff v. Green 836 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 2013
McCaughtry v. City of Red Wing 831 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 2013
Dickhoff ex rel. Dickhoff v. Green 836 N.W.2d 321 Minn. 2013
240-41 n. 2 (Minn.2011) (stating that "[bjecause the ...
Clifton v. State 830 N.W.2d 434 Minn. 2013
Clifton v. State 830 N.W.2d 434 Minn. 2013
When we review “the decisions] of the postconviction court, we review questions of law de novo.”
Francis v. State 829 N.W.2d 415 Minn. 2013
Francis v. State 829 N.W.2d 415 Minn. 2013
we considered “the degree of fault assigned to the party asserting the interests-of-justice claim.” The petitioner in Rickert was provided the transcripts needed to substantiate his postconviction claim just two business days before the expiration of the limitations period, even though he had request
Berkovitz v. State 826 N.W.2d 203 Minn. 2013
Berkovitz v. State 826 N.W.2d 203 Minn. 2013
(requiring a petition for postconviction relief to raise an exception to the limitations period).
Wallace v. State 820 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 2012
Wallace v. State 820 N.W.2d 843 Minn. 2012
(construing liberally a postconviction petition and accompanying documents to conclude that a petitioner had adequately invoked the interests-of-justice exception).
State v. Rick 821 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Rick 821 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
(“Generally, we will not address a constitutional issue if there is another basis upon which the case can be decided.”); , 269 n. 3 (Minn.1998) (“It is well-settled law that courts should not reach constitutional issues if matters can be resolved otherwise.”).
Jackson v. State 817 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 2012
Jackson v. State 817 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 2012
at 104-05 () (internal quotation marks omitted).
Sanchez v. State 816 N.W.2d 550 Minn. 2012
Carlton v. State 816 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 2012
Sanchez v. State 816 N.W.2d 550 Minn. 2012
6 Indeed, in Rickert v. State, we held *557 that “a petition for postconviction relief invoking an exception under subdivision 4(b) must be filed within two years of the date the interests-of-justice claim ‘arises.’” (emphasis added).
Carlton v. State 816 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 2012
The petitioner need show only “that there is a good-faith basis for the claim made in the petition, not that he necessarily would succeed on the merits.”
Colbert v. State 811 N.W.2d 103 Minn. 2012
Colbert v. State 811 N.W.2d 103 Minn. 2012
Roby v. State 808 N.W.2d 20 Minn. 2011
Roby v. State 808 N.W.2d 20 Minn. 2011
(concluding that the interests of justice exception was met where the petitioner had sought the service of the state public defender “well within” the statute of limitations period in subdivision 4(a), the petitioner’s counsel did not receive the necessary transcript until there were only 2 days left
Bee Yang v. State 805 N.W.2d 921 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Bee Yang v. State 805 N.W.2d 921 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
4(c); (applying subdivision 4(c) two-year time limitation to a petition invoking the subdivision 4(b)(5) exception).