Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Bobo v. State, 820 N.W.2d 511.

135 citing documents.

Nissalke v. State 861 N.W.2d 88 Minn. 2015
“[A] post-conviction court need not hold an eviden-tiary hearing when a petitioner ‘alleges facts that, if true, are legally insufficient to entitle him to the requested relief.’ ” ().
De-Aunteze Lavion Bobo v. State of Minnesota 860 N.W.2d 681 Minn. 2015
De-Aunteze Lavion Bobo v. State of Minnesota 860 N.W.2d 681 Minn. 2015
1 -37 (Minn. 2009), -15 (Minn. 2012), we limit our discussion of the facts to those directly related to this appeal.
Joshua Zachary Matter v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Joshua Zachary Matter v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Phillip Anthony Roberts v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Phillip Anthony Roberts v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Any doubts about whether to conduct an evidentiary hearing should be resolved in favor of the [petitioner].”
Danny Ortega, Jr. v. State of Minnesota 856 N.W.2d 98 Minn. 2014
Danny Ortega, Jr. v. State of Minnesota 856 N.W.2d 98 Minn. 2014
Raymond Darrel Pfarr v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Raymond Darrel Pfarr v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
d 511, 516 (Minn. 2012).
Laura Barreto Renteria v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Laura Barreto Renteria v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
9 (stating that an evidentiary hearing on a postconviction claim of ineffective assistance of counsel requires the petitioner to allege facts that, if proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence, would satisfy both prongs of the Strickland test).
Lincoln Lamar Caldwell v. State of Minnesota 853 N.W.2d 766 Minn. 2014
Lincoln Lamar Caldwell v. State of Minnesota 853 N.W.2d 766 Minn. 2014
at 734 ; -15, 520 (Minn.2012) (remanding for a postconviction evidentiary hearing based on newly discovered evidence in the form of third-party affidavits stating that an alleged alternative perpetrator had confessed to committing the crime).
Steven White v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Steven White v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Frank Duane Lussier v. State of Minnesota 853 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2014
Frank Duane Lussier v. State of Minnesota 853 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2014
To be entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, therefore, Lussier must have “alleged facts that, if proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence, would satisfy the two-prong test announced in Strickland [v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984)].”
Miles v. State 840 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2013
Miles v. State 840 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2013
-20 (Minn.2012); -37 (Minn.2010).
Hooper v. State 838 N.W.2d 775 Minn. 2013
Hooper v. State 838 N.W.2d 775 Minn. 2013
While doubts about whether to hold an evidentiary hearing should be resolved in favor of the petitioner, a post-conviction court “need not hold an eviden-tiary hearing when the petitioner alleges facts that, if true, are legally insufficient to entitle him to the requested relief.”
Dereje v. State 837 N.W.2d 714 Minn. 2013
Greer v. State 836 N.W.2d 520 Minn. 2013
Greer v. State 836 N.W.2d 520 Minn. 2013
State v. Nicks 831 N.W.2d 493 Minn. 2013
State v. Nicks 831 N.W.2d 493 Minn. 2013
2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984).”
Sontoya v. State 829 N.W.2d 602 Minn. 2013
Fort v. State 829 N.W.2d 78 Minn. 2013
Fort v. State 829 N.W.2d 78 Minn. 2013
McDonough v. State 827 N.W.2d 423 Minn. 2013
McDonough v. State 827 N.W.2d 423 Minn. 2013
A postconviction court “need not hold an evidentiary hearing when the petitioner alleges facts that, if true, are legally insufficient to entitle him to the requested relief.” see also Minn.Stat.
Martin v. State 825 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 2013
Martin v. State 825 N.W.2d 734 Minn. 2013