Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Cox, 820 N.W.2d 540.

147 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In the Matter of the Welfare of: J. C. L., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See State v. Cox , (noting that witness lied to police after crime was committed but concluding that no accomplice instruction was necessary).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Minn. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A20-0310 Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
It should be noted, however, that vacating appellant’s judgment of conviction under Count II does not overturn the jury’s guilty verdict on that count, as “a jury’s verdict is unaffected when a conviction on the verdict is vacated.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See State v. Cox , (stating that whether Minne sota law precludes multiple convictions for 21 separate offenses is a question of law); State v. Ferguson , (“Whether an offense is subject to multiple sentences under Minn. Stat. § 609.035 is a question of law, which we review de
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
d 540, 552 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State v. Cox , State v. Pendleton
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
d 540, 552 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Sonny Syhavong, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(“When determining whether a person played a knowing role in the commission of the crime, we may infer criminal intent from the person’s presence, companionship, and conduct both before and after the crime.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A18-1655 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Bauer 932 N.W.2d 47 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Bauer 932 N.W.2d 47 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Cox , , 552 (Minn. 2012).
A18-1246 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In the Matter of the Welfare of: D. A. D., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017