Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Raleigh, 778 N.W.2d 90.

864 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Jerrmaine Winston Knowles Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it.” State v. Raleigh
State of Minnesota v. Damon Michael DiMartino Minn. Ct. App. 2017
But, as the supreme court has more recently declared, “[a] defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it.” State v. Raleigh
Wilson Nduri Tindi v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Assessing the validity of a plea presents a question of law that we review de novo.” State v. Raleigh
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Dean Alley Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it.” State v. Raleigh , d 90, 93 (Minn. 2010).
State of Minnesota v. Bobby Joe Houle Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Mikulak 903 N.W.2d 600 Minn. 2017
State v. Mikulak 903 N.W.2d 600 Minn. 2017
State of Minnesota, vs Floyd Erik Hyde Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Arthur Rathbun Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A defendant bears the burden of showing his plea was invalid.” State v. Raleigh
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Michael Schirmer Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Ricardo Lavell Finn Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A court must allow a defendant to withdraw an involuntary plea because withdrawal is “necessary to correct a manifest injustice.” (quoting Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Tiffany Lynn Lambert Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it.” State v. Raleigh
State of Minnesota v. Mark Alan Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Michael Means Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Michael Dejaris Denson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Louis Ambrose Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Buster James Carson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
D E C I S I O N “A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea.”
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Lee Boulduc Minn. Ct. App. 2017
The purpose of the accuracy requirement is to “protect[] a defendant from pleading guilty to a more serious offense than that for which he could be convicted if he insisted on his right to trial.”
State of Minnesota v. James Michael Soderbeck Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Aaron Jude Schnagl Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A manifest injustice exists if a guilty plea is not valid.”
State of Minnesota v. Jack Kramer Allen, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A manifest injustice exists if a guilty plea is not valid.”
Brian Allen Barthel v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A manifest injustice exists if a guilty plea is not valid.”
Leanne Starr v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Robert Hovorka Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A district court must permit a defendant to withdraw a guilty plea “if wit hdrawal is necessary to correct a ‘manifest injustice.’” (quoting Minn. R. Crim.
Daniel Onguenyi Nyagoko v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Antion Deion Shelby, a/k/a Antione Tony Hill Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jason Michael Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it.”
Dikken v. State 896 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 2017
Dikken v. State 896 N.W.2d 873 Minn. 2017
“A manifest injustice exists if a guilty plea is not valid.”
State v. Ellis-Strong 899 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Ellis-Strong 899 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Because ineffective assistance of counsel may render a plea constitutionally invalid, Sames, d at 567 , and “[a] manifest injustice exists if a guilty plea is not valid,” a guilty plea based on ineffective assistance of counsel creates a manifest injustice as a matter of law.
State of Minnesota v. Edward Keith Dembry Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A defendant has no absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it.”
State of Minnesota v. Aaron Gary Broehl Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Virgil Ernest Beaulieu Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[Appellate courts] review a district c ourt’s decision to deny a wit hdrawal motion for abuse of discretion, reversing only in the rare case.” State v. Raleigh , (quotation omitted).
State v. Montez 899 N.W.2d 200 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Montez 899 N.W.2d 200 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(requiring withdrawal when a plea is not accurate, voluntary, or intelligent).
State of Minnesota v. Bobby Joe Houle Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Clayton James Hanks v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Adolfo Gutirrez Avila Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Erasmo Monge Rauda v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A defendant does not have an “absolute right to withdraw a guilty plea after entering it.”
State v. Brown 896 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Brown 896 N.W.2d 557 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Lester Leander Wiechmann v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Ronald James Fairbanks Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Boecker 893 N.W.2d 348 Minn. 2017
State v. Boecker 893 N.W.2d 348 Minn. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Dashondra Webster Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Eugene Ryan Boos Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Blaine Eldon Raincloud Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Milton Joseph Budreau, III v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017