Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Martin v. State, 825 N.W.2d 734.
- Randy Leeroyal Swaney v. State of Minnesota 882 N.W.2d 207 Minn. 2016
- Robert Patrick Butters v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
-
Robert Patrick Butters v. State of Minnesota
Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“A defendant cannot recharacterize a claim previously litigated to avoid the Knaffla procedural bar.”
- Rene Julian McKenzie v. State of Minnesota 872 N.W.2d 865 Minn. 2015
-
Rene Julian McKenzie v. State of Minnesota
872 N.W.2d 865
Minn. 2015
In order to satisfy the first prong under Larrison, “the recantation must contain ‘sufficient indicia of trustworthiness’ ” leading the court to be “reasonably certain that the recantation is genuine.” Martin, d at 290 ().
- LaMonte Rydell Martin v. State of Minnesota 865 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2015
-
LaMonte Rydell Martin v. State of Minnesota
865 N.W.2d 282
Minn. 2015
Martin v. State (Martin II)
- State of Minnesota v. Justin Michael Fenney Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
State of Minnesota v. Justin Michael Fenney
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Appellate courts “examine whether the jury would not likely have found the defendant guilty [without the testimony] and consider whether the other evidence against the defendant was overwhelming.” (quotation omitted).
- Myon Demarlo Burrell v. State of Minnesota 858 N.W.2d 779 Minn. 2015
- Myon Demarlo Burrell v. State of Minnesota 858 N.W.2d 779 Minn. 2015
- 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
- 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