Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Curtis, 921 N.W.2d 342.

88 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(noting that the court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
N.H., Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
We are therefore bound to apply it.5
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Nicks, d at 506; d 342, 346 (Minn. 2018) (“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(noting that we are “bound by supreme court precedent”).
In re the Matter of Kenneth Alan Hovland, OBO Minor Children, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State v. Curtis , (“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Pate v. Robinson , 383 U.S. 375, 378, 86 S. Ct. 836, 838 (1966); State v. Curtis
Followed Bunrerth Mao, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Whitney Hinrichs-Cady, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
We do not by our holding here, or by noting Judge Alsop’s concern expressed in Pierce, question the viability of the supreme court’s Williams holding
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See Minn. Const. art. VI, § 2 (identifying this court’s appellate jurisdiction over “all courts, except the supreme court, and other appellate jurisdiction as prescribed by law”); (“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent, as it has repeatedly acknowledged.”).
Followed State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent .
Simon Duku Boateng, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent .
Overruled Sonny Syhavong, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
d 342, 346 (Minn. 2018).
Timothy Wodarck, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 342, 346 (Minn. 2018) (“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(holding that “[t]he court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Because this court is bound to follow supreme court precedent, we conclude that the district court did not err when it denied Northrup’s motion to dismiss the charges against him.
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Christopher Scott Malz. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
This court “is bound by supreme court precedent.” State v. Curtis
Followed State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Curtis , (“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent, as it has repeatedly acknowledged.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Minn. Const. art. VI, § 2 (identifying this court’s appellate jurisdiction “over all courts, except the supreme court, and all other appellate jurisdiction as proscribed by law”); (“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent, as it has repeatedly acknowledged.”); d 763, 767 (Minn. App. 2010), review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
This court is “bound by supreme court precedent.”
Followed State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Nevertheless, Harris reaffirms Minnesota’s two -step appellate review of convictions that rest solely on circumstantial evidence, d at 600, and we are bound by the law as established by the Minnesota Supreme Court, (“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent.”).
Pamela Maslowski, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
9 See State v. Curtis , (noting that court of appeals “is bound by supreme court precedent”).
Followed Dewey Hill III Townhomes Association, Inc., Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
But the Minnesota Supreme Court has made it abundantly clear that we are bound by its decisions, d 342, 343 (Minn. 2018), and Auto-Owners’ argument here is a naked invitation to disregard the supreme court’s holding in Poehler.
Al Dressely, et al., Respondents, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
This court “is bound by supreme court precedent.” State v. Curtis , 6 (Minn. 2018); see also State v. M.L.A.
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Followed State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“ The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent .
Followed State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
And we are “bound by supreme court precedent.” State v. Curtis
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
And “[t]he court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent.” d 342, 342 (Minn. 2018).
Bedeau v. Evans 926 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Bedeau v. Evans 926 N.W.2d 425 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Curtis , , 342 (Minn. 2018) ("The court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent.").
Oluf Johnson, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(holding that the Minnesota Court of Appeals is bound by Minnesota Supreme Court precedent).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Charles Richard Stone. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
15, 2013) ; State v. Curtis , (holding court of appeals is bound by supreme court precedent) .

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by