Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Blom, 682 N.W.2d 578.

190 citing documents.

State v. Poetschke 750 N.W.2d 301 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
See, (stating that medical records generally fall under the physician-patient privilege but that a defendant can also waive this privilege); State v. Staat, 291 Minn. 394, 398-400 , -97 (1971) (discussing the statutory requirements to determine whether the physician-patient privilege app
State v. Smith 749 N.W.2d 88 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Smith 749 N.W.2d 88 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
Blom v. State 744 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 2007
Blom v. State 744 N.W.2d 16 Minn. 2007
State v. Clark 738 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2007
State v. Clark 738 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2007
in which we identified as relevant the defendant’s extensive criminal background and concomitant experience in the criminal justice system; in which we noted that although the defendant was on prescription drugs, there was no evidence that he was materially impaired when he “spoke in a normal tone of voice, freely and voluntarily gave answers to questions, and was alert, lucid, cooperative, and calm.” 6 In *333 light of these and other c
State v. Gomez 721 N.W.2d 871 Minn. 2006
State v. Gomez 721 N.W.2d 871 Minn. 2006
State v. Wright 719 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2006
State v. Wright 719 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2006
State v. Scanlon 719 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 2006
State v. Dettman 719 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 2006
Explained State v. Scanlon 719 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 2006
Additionally, we have noted that a defendant’s right to present witnesses is constitutionally protected, but “with that right comes the obligation to comply with procedural and evidentiary rules.”
State v. Dettman 719 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 2006
State v. Osborne 715 N.W.2d 436 Minn. 2006
State v. Vance 714 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 2006
State v. Vance 714 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 2006
State v. Gail 713 N.W.2d 851 Minn. 2006
State v. Gail 713 N.W.2d 851 Minn. 2006
State v. Ness 707 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 2006
State v. Ness 707 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 2006
See, -02 (Minn.2005); -98 (Minn.1987); 612 (Minn.2004).
State v. Montgomery 707 N.W.2d 392 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Montgomery 707 N.W.2d 392 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. McLeod 705 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 2005
State v. McLeod 705 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 2005
Spann v. State 704 N.W.2d 486 Minn. 2005
Spann v. State 704 N.W.2d 486 Minn. 2005
The rights that we have allowed defendants to waive are rights personal to the defendant and include a waiver of Miranda rights, the right to counsel, State v. Blom,, the right to a jury trial, -18 (1995), Minn. R.Crim.
State v. Leake 699 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 2005
State v. Leake 699 N.W.2d 312 Minn. 2005
State v. Blanche 696 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2005
State v. Blanche 696 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2005
State v. Burrell 697 N.W.2d 579 Minn. 2005
State v. Burrell 697 N.W.2d 579 Minn. 2005
State v. Lasnetski 696 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Lasnetski 696 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
see also United States v. Mezzanatto, 513 U.S. 196, 201 , 115 S.Ct.
State v. Washington 693 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2005
State v. Washington 693 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2005
State v. Washington 693 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2005
State v. Washington 693 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2005
State v. Blom , , 611 (Minn. 2004).