Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Randy Leeroyal Swaney v. State of Minnesota, 882 N.W.2d 207.

85 citing documents.

Emad Gh Al Rousan v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Brandon Jerome Hanson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Courts “review in effective assistance cl aims with a strong presumption that counsel’s performance was reasonable.” Swaney v. State , d 207, 217 (Minn. 2016).
Miguel Angel Rodriguez v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Felix Kasper Piah v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Shawn Clarke Spottswood Minn. Ct. App. 2020
1 (2018); see Swaney v. State , d 207, 214 (Minn. 2016).
James Leon Nordrum, Jr. v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Dean Aaron Anderson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See, e.g. , Swaney v. State , (deciding that the interests -of-justice exception did not apply because the appella nt offered “no argument as to why his failure to raise this issue in his pro se brief on direct appeal was not deliberate and inexcusable”).
Andrew Bearden Williams v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
This decision will not be reversed “unless the [district] court exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, based its ruling on an error of law, or made clearly erroneous factual findings.” Swaney v. State
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Jeremiah Jerome Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Swaney v. State , d 207, 217 (Minn. 2016).
John Louis Corrigan v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Onyelobi v. State 932 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2019
Onyelobi v. State 932 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2019
Brocks v. State , , 675 (Minn. 2008) ; see also, e.g. , Swaney v. State , , 215 (Minn. 2016) (" Knaffla's interests-of-justice exception ...
Paul Ronny Barsness v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A ‘reasonable probability’ is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome of the case.”
State of Minnesota v. Troy Lewis Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Michael Opeoluwa Adebayo v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Chester Lee Grauberger Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Swaney v. State , n.7 (Minn. 2016).
State of Minnesota v. Raymundo Zeferino-Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. William Joseph Sullivan Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Sullivan “must show that (1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
State of Minnesota v. John Willard Greywind, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Michael Jay Flavin Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“To prove ineffect ive assistance of counsel, a petitioner 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 errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.” Swaney v. State
State of Minnesota v. Antone Larron Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Boe Michael Tankersley Minn. Ct. App. 2018
” Swaney v. State , (quotation omitted).
Francisco Cleofus Mountain v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
A claim may not be procedurally b arred (1) “if the claim involves an issue so novel that its legal basis was not reasonably available at the time of the direct appeal” or (2) if reviewing the claim would be in the interests of justice because it “has substantive merit and the petitioner d id not deliberately and inexcusably fail to raise the issue.” ; see also id .
In the Matter of the Welfare of the Child of: L. M. W. and H. E. P., Parents Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Jason Edward Banks v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Cory Leo Kellermann Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Maksud Ul Mahbub v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(noting that claims based solely on events that occurred at or before trial are Knaffla-barred because these claims were or should have been known to the petitioner at the time of his direct appeal).
Ryan Daniel Jones-Adams v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Erasmo Monge Rauda v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
To 8 establish ineffective assistance of counsel, appellant must demonstrate that “(1) counsel’s representation fell below an objective standa rd of reasonableness and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.”
State v. Mosley 895 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 2017
State v. Mosley 895 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 2017
“A ‘reasonable probability’ is a probability sufficient to undermine confidence in the outcome of the case.”
Brent Lanier Lynch v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Sahal Osman Shidane v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 207, 214 (Minn. 2016).
Freddie James Prewitt v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Freddie James Prewitt v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017