Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Griffin, 834 N.W.2d 688.

54 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Adam Taylor Fravel Minn. 2026
() (internal quotation marks omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Justin Bradley Camp Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Justin Bradley Camp Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Ivan Contreras-Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Ivan Contreras-Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“A defendant’s rights to challenge any search under Article I, Section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution are coextensive with the defendant’s rights under the Fourth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” -96 (Minn. 2013) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
at 292-93 (d 688, 693 (Minn. 2013)).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Minn. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
at 292 (quoting State v. Griffin , ).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Griffin , ; State v. Amos , 6 .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
State v. Griffin , , 693 (Minn. 2013) (quoting State v. Davis , , 537 (Minn. 2012) ).
State v. Leonard 923 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Leonard 923 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Griffin , , 696 (Minn. 2013) (quotation omitted).
Shawdy Kiani, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See State v. Griffin , -95 (Minn. 2013).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[E]videntiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the [district] court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” (quo tation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
However, “[a] defendant’s rights to challenge any search under Article I, Section 10 of the Minnesota Constitution are coextensive with [the defendant’ s] rights under the Fourth 10 Amendment to the United States Constitution.” –96 (Minn. 2013) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Tommy William Mix Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tommy William Mix Minn. Ct. App. 2016
n.6 (Minn. 2013) (quoting Minn. Stat. § 595.02, subd.
State of Minnesota v. Ashley Ann Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ashley Ann Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Derrick Trevor Griffin v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2016
Derrick Trevor Griffin v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2016
State v. Griffin (Griffin I)
State of Minnesota v. Jonathon Michael Honeycutt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jonathon Michael Honeycutt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Erik Demetrius White, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Erik Demetrius White, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[T]he district court has broad discretion in resolving evidentiary matters.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Zakaria Abdinasser Yusuf Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Zakaria Abdinasser Yusuf Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Levi Chen-Wah Leong Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Levi Chen-Wah Leong Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[E]videntiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Albert Michael Openshaw Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Wayne Deante Akis Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Wayne Deante Akis Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Albert Michael Openshaw Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Osma Mardoqueo Escho Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Osma Mardoqueo Escho Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[E]videntiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” 3 (Minn. 2013) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Tyrone Joseph Mohr Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Tyrone Joseph Mohr Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Steven Pettinelli Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Steven Pettinelli Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[E]videntiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the [district] court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.” 21 (quotation omitted); (stating that the decision whether to admit expert testimony is within the discretion of the district court).
State of Minnesota v. La�Rog Daquan Meadows Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. La�Rog Daquan Meadows Minn. Ct. App. 2014