Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Radke, 821 N.W.2d 316.

83 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In deciding whether an instruction is warranted, [appellate courts], like the [district] court, must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Mary Marie Garner Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Mary Marie Garner Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Joseph Shane 883 N.W.2d 606 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Joseph Shane 883 N.W.2d 606 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“In deciding whether an instruction is warranted, we, like the trial court, must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant.”
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Eggermont Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Chevaze Darrell Ward Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Robert Michael Heath Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Eggermont Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(citations and footnote omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Chevaze Darrell Ward Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Robert Michael Heath Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(“[I]t is the State that bears the ultimate burden of disproving self-defense.”).
State of Minnesota v. Scott Jeffrey Hanson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Scott Jeffrey Hanson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Izell Wright Robinson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Izell Wright Robinson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
would have been different.” (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2068 (1984)).
State of Minnesota v. Sonny Ray Juday Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Sonny Ray Juday Minn. Ct. App. 2016
would have been different.”
State of Minnesota v. Luis Daniel Ruiz-Oliva Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Luis Daniel Ruiz-Oliva Minn. Ct. App. 2016
would have been different.” d 316, 323 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota v. Damien Tito Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Damien Tito Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2015
must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant.”
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Niles Hubbard Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Niles Hubbard Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(citations omitted) (footnote omitted).
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. Ronald Matthew Quiceno Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Matthew Quiceno Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(concluding that defendant’s attempts to persuade witness not to speak to others demonstrated lack of heat of passion).
State of Minnesota v. Alvin Lee Fitzgerald, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Alvin Lee Fitzgerald, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Wilson 830 N.W.2d 849 Minn. 2013
State v. Wilson 830 N.W.2d 849 Minn. 2013
4 When “deciding whether an instruction is warranted, we, like the trial court, must view the evidence in the light most favorable to the defendant.”