Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Darryl Colbert v. State of Minnesota, 870 N.W.2d 616.

125 citing documents.

John Louis Corrigan v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The Knaffla rule is that, “once a direct appeal has been taken, all claims raised in the direct appeal and all claims that were known or should have been known but were not raised in the direct appeal are procedurally barred.” (emphasis omitted).
Rossberg v. State 932 N.W.2d 6 Minn. 2019
Rossberg v. State 932 N.W.2d 6 Minn. 2019
Colbert v. State , , 622 (Minn. 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Daquan Ossie Bradley Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(citing circumstances where structural error has applied).
Jackson v. State 929 N.W.2d 903 Minn. 2019
Jackson v. State 929 N.W.2d 903 Minn. 2019
Colbert v. State , , 622 (Minn. 2015).
Paul Ronny Barsness v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Under the Knaffla rule, “once a direct appeal has been taken, all claims raised in the direct appeal and all claims that were known or should have been 4 known but were not raised in the direct appe al are procedurally barred.” (emphasis omitted).
Daniel Leith Renville v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Jackson v. State 927 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 2019
Jackson v. State 927 N.W.2d 308 Minn. 2019
Colbert v. State , , 622 (Minn. 2015).
Deontray Vershon Tate v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Under the Knaffla rule, “once a direct appeal has been taken, all claims raised in the direct appeal and all claims that were kno wn or should have been known but were not raised in the direct appeal are procedurally barred.” (emphasis omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Terry Lovell Arrington Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Cumulative error exists when the cumulative effect of the errors and indiscretions, none of which alone might have been enough to tip the scales, opera te to the defendant’s prejudice by producing a biased jury.” n.10 (Minn. 2015) (quotation omitted).
Jackson v. State 919 N.W.2d 470 Minn. 2018
Jackson v. State 919 N.W.2d 470 Minn. 2018
Colbert v. State , , 622 (Minn. 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Lee Stands Minn. Ct. App. 2018
D E C I S I O N This court “reviews the denial of a petition for postconviction relief, as well as a request for an evidentiary hearing, for an abuse of discretion.” d 616, 621 (Minn. 2015).
Campbell v. State 916 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 2018
Campbell v. State 916 N.W.2d 502 Minn. 2018
Colbert v. State , , 621 (Minn. 2015).
Jeremia Joseph Loper v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Demetreus Anthony McGinnis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Colbert v. State , 1 (Minn. 2015).
Andersen v. State 913 N.W.2d 417 Minn. 2018
Andersen v. State 913 N.W.2d 417 Minn. 2018
A petition that is filed outside the statute of limitations may be summarily denied, Colbert v. State , , 622 (Minn. 2015), unless a statutory exception applies, see Minn. Stat. § 590.01 , subd.
Jermaine Sylvester Watkins v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Majinieke Vasha Thompson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Berry Alan Willis v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Peter Louis John v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Michael Gene Southern Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Amecio Navro Enge v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Hassan Mohamed Abdillahi v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Eric J. Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Colbert v. State , 5-26 (Minn. 2015) (citing Knaffla, 309 Minn. at 252, d at 741).1 Ineffective assistance of trial counsel Johnson argues that the postconviction court abused its discretion by failing to hold a hearing on his claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.
Maksud Ul Mahbub v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See Colbert v. State , (“[T]he Knaffla rule bars consideration of claims that .
Michael Robert Robinson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Desmond Lamart Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(citing McKaskle v. Wiggins, 465 U.S. 168, 177 n.8, 104 S. Ct .
Pearson v. State 891 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 2017
Pearson v. State 891 N.W.2d 590 Minn. 2017
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: G. A. and R. O. C. A., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: G. A. and R. O. C. A., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Moreover, “[s]tructural errors resulting in automatic reversal occur only in a very limited class of cases.” (quotation omitted).
Freddie James Prewitt v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Freddie James Prewitt v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“A postconviction court need not grant a hearing on a claim if the files and records of the proceeding conclusively establish that the petitioner is not entitled to relief.” (citing Minn. Stat. § 590.04, subd.
Brian Keith Hooper v. State of Minnesota 888 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 2016
Brian Keith Hooper v. State of Minnesota 888 N.W.2d 138 Minn. 2016
or procedurally barred.”
Lincoln Lamar Caldwell v. State of Minnesota 886 N.W.2d 491 Minn. 2016
Lincoln Lamar Caldwell v. State of Minnesota 886 N.W.2d 491 Minn. 2016
Because of this assumption, we applied the “substantial interference” -25 (Minn. 2015).
Lana Dawn Hansch Barnes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Lana Dawn Hansch Barnes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Kim Thul Ouk v. State of Minnesota 884 N.W.2d 392 Minn. 2016
Kim Thul Ouk v. State of Minnesota 884 N.W.2d 392 Minn. 2016
d 616, 622 (Minn. 2015).
Derrick Delmar Brocks v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 602 Minn. 2016
Lane Francis Weitzel v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 553 Minn. 2016
Kent Richard Jones v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 2016
Derrick Delmar Brocks v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 602 Minn. 2016