Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Murphy, 380 N.W.2d 766.

89 citing documents.

State v. Harwell 515 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Russell 503 N.W.2d 110 Minn. 1993
State v. Russell 503 N.W.2d 110 Minn. 1993
Id.; , 771 n. 3 (Minn.1986).
Friedman v. Commissioner of Public Safety 473 N.W.2d 828 Minn. 1991
Friedman v. Commissioner of Public Safety 455 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Friedman v. Commissioner of Public Safety 455 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
State v. Gore 451 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1990
State v. Gore 451 N.W.2d 313 Minn. 1990
The decision whether to instruct the jury on a lesser charge is within the discretion of the trial court, but should be submitted when (1) the evidence would reasonably support a conviction of the lesser crime, and (2) the evidence would also reasonably support an acquittal of the defendant of the greater crime charged.
State v. Ronnebaum 449 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1990
State v. Ronnebaum 449 N.W.2d 722 Minn. 1990
Thus, a suspect has no right to counsel, even if he asks for it, if no charge has been filed against him and if he is not “in custody.” , 769-70 n. 2 (Minn.1986) (addressed the issue under both federal and state constitutions).
State v. Jensen 448 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Jensen 448 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. VanWert 438 N.W.2d 416 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. VanWert 438 N.W.2d 416 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Christensen 439 N.W.2d 389 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Christensen 439 N.W.2d 389 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Collard 414 N.W.2d 733 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Collard 414 N.W.2d 733 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Larsen 413 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Larsen 413 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Lindberg 408 N.W.2d 589 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Lindberg 408 N.W.2d 589 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Perez 404 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Perez 404 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
in which the supreme court held that the defendant’s killing the victim after raping her was one continuous act.
State v. Tuomi 396 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Tuomi 396 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
However, the Minnesota Supreme Court noted that the Minnesota self-incrimination clause is identical to the fifth amendment to the United States Constitution; therefore, the United States Supreme Court interpretation of the federal provision is of “inherently persuasive, although not compelling, force.” Id.
State v. Anderson 396 N.W.2d 564 Minn. 1986
State v. Anderson 396 N.W.2d 564 Minn. 1986
1136 , 79 L.Ed.2d 409 (1984), (holding trial court’s admission of confession by probationer to probation agent, despite probation agent’s statement to probationer that her main concern was that he would need further treatment — implying that confession would lead to treatment).
State v. Mitjans 394 N.W.2d 221 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Mitjans 394 N.W.2d 221 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
“The determination of which, if any, lesser offenses should be submitted to the jury lies within the trial court’s discretion, but when the evidence warrants such an instruction, it must be given.” ().
Bellcourt v. State 390 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1986
Bellcourt v. State 390 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1986
State v. Werman 388 N.W.2d 748 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Werman 388 N.W.2d 748 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Collins v. State 385 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Collins v. State 385 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
While a United States Supreme Court interpretation of the identical federal provision is therefore of inherently persuasive, although not compelling, force, (Minn. Jan.
State v. Bennett 383 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Bennett 383 N.W.2d 414 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
19(3) “the court has the discretion to decide whether to amplify previous instructions, reread previous instructions, or give no response at all.”
State v. Gullekson 383 N.W.2d 338 Minn. Ct. App. 1986