Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Hahn, 799 N.W.2d 25.

61 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Scott Michael Popa Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Francisco Cleofus Mountain Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Francisco Cleofus Mountain Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-35 (Minn. 2011) (concluding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting pornographic photographs even though a witness could have testified to their existence).
State of Minnesota v. Roxanne Kay DeFlorin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Roxanne Kay DeFlorin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A speedy-trial challenge presents a constitutional question subject to de novo review.” review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Simeon Laderick Sharp Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Simeon Laderick Sharp Minn. Ct. App. 2014
To determine whether a defendant’s speedy-trial right has been violated, we examine the factors set out in Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514, 92 S. Ct. 2182 (1972): “(1) the length of the delay; (2) the reason for the delay; (3) whether the defendant asserted his right to a speedy trial; and (4) whether the delay prejudiced the defendant.” Johnson, d at 144 ().
State v. Johnson 811 N.W.2d 136 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Johnson 811 N.W.2d 136 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
why the defendant should not be brought to trial within that period.” -30 (Minn.App.2011) (quoting DeRosier, d at 108-09 ), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State v. Nelson 806 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Nelson 806 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2011