Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State of Minnesota v. Kenneth E. Andersen, 871 N.W.2d 910.

200 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Travis Clay Andersen Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See State v. Bartylla , (stating this court will not consider pro se arguments on appeal that are not supported by either arguments or citations to legal authority); (“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (quotation omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Ivan Shines Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Olabamidele Olumide Bewaji Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (quotation omitted).
Paul Hansmeier v. Tobies Enterprises, Inc. Minn. Ct. App. 2024
1 (“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (d 539, 552 (Minn. 2009))).
State of Minnesota v. Devon James Block Minn. Ct. App. 2024
The “district court has broad discretion to award restitution, and the district court’s order will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.” State v. Andersen
In the Matter of the Welfare of J. D. C., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Katelynn Marie Pick Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Leneil James Colbert Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Schoepke v. Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Co., (applying this aspect of Schoepke).
In the Matter of the Welfare of: S. S. M., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2024
5 “A district court has broad discretion to award restitution, and the district court’s order will not be reversed absent an abuse of that discretion.”
John Louis Corrigan, Sr. v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Delilah Golden Metoxen Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Delilah Golden Metoxen Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See Schoepke v. Alexander Smith & Sons Carpet Co., d 133, 135 (Minn. 1971) (“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.”); (applying this aspect of Schoepke).
John Louis Corrigan, Sr. v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
see also Stone v. Invitation Homes, Inc., d 489, 494 n.6 (Minn. 2024) (explaining that, despite the Minnesota Supreme Court’s use of the term “waived” in previous decisions, “waiver is when a known right is voluntarily relinquished, whereas forfeiture occurs when a party fails to timely a
State of Minnesota v. Demetrius Antonio Wynne Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Janella Scott v. The Phoenix Residence, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Janella Scott v. The Phoenix Residence, Inc., Department of Employment and Economic Development Minn. Ct. App. 2024
1(1); (“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (quotation omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. Demetrius Antonio Wynne Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (Andersen I) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Steven Craig Morrow Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Steven Craig Morrow Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of Kathryn Marie Larson On Behalf of Minor Child v. Keith Norman Marohn Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Ricky Jesse Lopez Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Larry Ray House Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Larry Ray House Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” d 910, 915 (Minn. 2015) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Jaundale Maurice Berry Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Joseph John Hall Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Joseph John Hall Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(stating that an assignment of error in a brief based on mere assertion and not supported by argument or authority is waived unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection).
Randy Terrell Mayberry v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Randy Terrell Mayberry v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Heather Marie Wurtzberger Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Aleshia Lynn Becklund Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal .
William Demont White, Jr. v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(holding that arguments not supported by argument are generally forfeited).
State of Minnesota v. Braylen Justice Miller Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Dontae Deshaun White Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Laurssia Keyair Likness Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 910, 913 (Minn. 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Carolina Zarate Minn. Ct. App. 2023
( reciting principle that “[a]n assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities .
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Deshaun Everett Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Jason Paul Baumer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Roosevelt Bartu Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Wyatt Christopher Labeau Minn. Ct. App. 2023
In re State of Minnesota, Petitioner, Minn. 2023
See State v. Ali , (“[W]e will not decide issues that were not raised before the district court, even when criminal defendants raise constitutional claims for the first time on appeal.”); –41 (Minn. 2020) (dismissing the defendant’s 10 In re Leslie v. Emerson
State of Minnesota v. Pao Choua Yang Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 910, 915 (Minn. 2015) (“An assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection.” (quotation omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. Moosisaa Dhugumaa Bulchaa Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 910, 915 (Minn. 2015).
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Barrett Graham Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See, (explaining that “[a]n assignment of error based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities in appellant’s brief is waived and will not be considered on appeal unless prejudicial error is obvious on mere inspection” (quotation omitted)).
Aretina Tiaira Williams v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Marthamae Kottschade v. Richard A. Mokua, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Schoepke v. Alexander 11 Smith & Sons Carpet Co., (applying this aspect of Schoepke); Ganguli v. Univ.
State of Minnesota v. Dejahn Akeem Wiley-Hunt Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Melvin Charles Kingbird Minn. Ct. App. 2022
This court reviews a district court’s “broad discretion to award restitution” for “abuse of that discretion.”
State of Minnesota v. Jory Daniel Wiebrand Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Ramiro Cruz-Pineda Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See S tate v. Andersen , (stating that a claim of error “based on mere assertion and not supported by any argument or authorities .
State of Minnesota v. Cameron Oneal Clark Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(holding that an assertion without further argument or supporting authority is waived unless prejudicial error is obvious upon mere inspection).