Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hawes v. State, 826 N.W.2d 775.

87 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Angel Ignacio Sardina-Padilla 7 N.W.3d 585 Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Angel Ignacio Sardina-Padilla 7 N.W.3d 585 Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Marvel Galvaston Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Marvel Galvaston Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(noting that a reviewing court need not address both parts of the Strickland test if one is determinative).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(evaluating only harmless error).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A Confrontation Clause error is harmless when the verdict is “surely unattributable to the error.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Appellate courts “need not address both prongs if one is determin ative.” Hawes v. State
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Lopez-Ramos 913 N.W.2d 695 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Lopez-Ramos 913 N.W.2d 695 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Hawes v. State , , 786 (Minn. 2013).
Gideon Charles Arrington, II, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(citing Strickland, 466 U.S. at 698, 104 S. Ct. at 2070).
Antonio Xavier Daniels, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“We review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.” (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 698, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2070 (1984)).
A16-1196 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
And, because a reviewing court need not address both prongs of the Strickland test if one is dispositive, we need not reach the second prong.
State v. Larsen 901 N.W.2d 433 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Larsen 901 N.W.2d 433 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-83 (Minn. 2013) (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694 , 104 S.Ct.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Appellate courts “ review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“We review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A violation of the Confrontation Clause occurs when the accused is not afforded the right to confront the witnesses against him.”
Ronnie Jerome Jackson, III, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“We review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.” (citing Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 698, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2070 (1984)).
State of Minnesota v. Renard Rucker Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Renard Rucker Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“We review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.”
State of Minnesota v. Edward Antonio Zappa Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Edward Antonio Zappa Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 775, 786 (Minn. 2013).
Seth Clayton Francis Crawford v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Seth Clayton Francis Crawford v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Anthony Torgesen Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Anthony Torgesen Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Charles Kwadzo Sokpa-Anku v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Charles Kwadzo Sokpa-Anku v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“We review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.”
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Casa Roby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Casa Roby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Vincent Walker Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Vincent Walker Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Patricia Ann Shepard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Patricia Ann Shepard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Virginia Marie Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Virginia Marie Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 775, 782 (Minn. 2013).
Wayne Deante Akis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Wayne Deante Akis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Patrick Charles Bonga Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Patrick Charles Bonga Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“We review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.”
Brandon Darnell Barnes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Brandon Darnell Barnes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ineffective Assistance of Counsel “We review the denial of postconviction relief based on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel de novo because such a claim involves a mixed question of law and fact.”

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by