Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Nissalke v. State, 861 N.W.2d 88.

129 citing documents.

Pearson v. State 891 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 2017
Pearson v. State 891 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 2017
94 n.4 (Minn. 2015) (concluding that "neither Knaffla exception applies, [so] we need not address the issue of whether the Knaffla exceptions survive the 2005 amendments to Minn. Stat. § 590.01 , subd.
State of Minnesota v. Guy Robert Franklin Rabold Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(explaining the standard for an 11 ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim).
State of Minnesota v. Renard Rucker Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Renard Rucker Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-94 (Minn. 2015) (citing Strickland v. Washington, 3 466 U.S. 668, 687-88, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Anthony Torgesen Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Anthony Torgesen Minn. Ct. App. 2017
To prevail on his ineffective-assistance-of-counsel claim, Torgesen must demonstrate “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s 8 unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
State of Minnesota v. Derrean Darnell Hogan Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Derrean Darnell Hogan Minn. Ct. App. 2017
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Hogan must demonstrate “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of 7 reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
Timothy Ayman Bakdash v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Timothy Ayman Bakdash v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Marlon Rashaad Robertson 884 N.W.2d 864 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Marlon Rashaad Robertson 884 N.W.2d 864 Minn. 2016
21 result of the proceeding would have been different.’ ” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694 (1984)).
State of Minnesota v. Steven Kobena Ampah Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Steven Kobena Ampah Minn. Ct. App. 2016
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Ampah must demonstrate “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
LaQuinn Jamul Williams v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
LaQuinn Jamul Williams v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Williams must show “(1) that his counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; 3 and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Ronald David Olson 884 N.W.2d 906 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ronald David Olson 884 N.W.2d 906 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Olson must demonstrate “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
Patrick Samuel Meszaros v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ernest Alvin Ranzy Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ernest Alvin Ranzy Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Ranzy must demonstrate “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
Patrick Samuel Meszaros v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(stating that for valid ineffective assistance of counsel claim, appellant must show “(1) that his counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding woul
Jamal Abdi Madar v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jamal Abdi Madar v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jerome Emmanuel Davis v. State of Minnesota 880 N.W.2d 373 Minn. 2016
Jerome Emmanuel Davis v. State of Minnesota 880 N.W.2d 373 Minn. 2016
n.4 (Minn. 2015) (declining to address whether the Knaffla exceptions survive the 2005 amendments to Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd.
Wayne Deante Akis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Wayne Deante Akis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
B. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Akis must demonstrate “(1) that his counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness; and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” 6 (Minn. 2015) (quotation omitted).
Jeffrey Edward Morey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jeffrey Edward Morey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jovon Perez Davis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jovon Perez Davis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Mackey Keyota Drake Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Mark Oran Schorn v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Clinton Lee Strother v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Mark Oran Schorn v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Claims of ineffective assistance of counsel require a party to show “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
State of Minnesota v. Mackey Keyota Drake Minn. Ct. App. 2016
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must show “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
Clinton Lee Strother v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
See Colbert, d at 626-27 (explaining and applying Knaffla rule); (“If a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel can be determined on the basis of the trial record, the claim must be brought on direct appeal or it is Knaffla-barred.”).
Thomas Ardell Gentry v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Thomas Ardell Gentry v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“If a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel can be determined on the basis of the trial record, the claim must be brought 3 on direct appeal or it is Knaffla-barred.”
Monda Thao v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Monda Thao v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ineffective assistance of counsel To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, appellant must demonstrate “(1) that [her] counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
Jamel Daniel Hoard v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jamel Daniel Hoard v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
C. Ineffective Assistance of Counsel To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, Hoard must demonstrate “(1) that his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).
Rojelio Castillo v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ger Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Aaron Wayne Downing v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Aaron Wayne Downing v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
reh’g denied (May 20, 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Ger Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2016
his counsel’s representation ‘fell below an objective standard of reasonableness’; and (2) ‘there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.’” (quoting Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 688, 694, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 2064, 2068 (1984)).