Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Flicek, 657 N.W.2d 592.

32 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Sharon Ann Schmalzriedt Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“[T]heft by swindle requires the intent to defraud, ” and “[i]nherent in the intent requirement is that the swindler must act affirmatively to defraud another.” (quotations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Roald Dean Marth Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Roald Dean Marth Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The offense of theft by swindle has three elements: (1) the defendant obtained another’s property (2) through “affirmative fraudulent or deceitful behavior” and (3) had “the intent to defraud.” -98 (Minn. App. 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Karl Evald Auleciems Minn. Ct. App. 2025
To prove that Auleciems committed theft by swindle, the state had to show he (1) obtained another’s property (2) through “affirmative fraudulent or deceitful behavior” and that (3) he had “the intent to defraud.”
State of Minnesota v. Gerhard Arthur Ziemann Minn. Ct. App. 2024
To “swindle” “requires a showing of affirmative fraudulent or deceitful behavior.”
Herald Edward Liu v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2022
A “swindle” is the act of “defrauding another person by an intentional misrepresentation or scheme.”
State of Minnesota v. Bridgett Ann Burrell Minn. Ct. App. 2020
d 592, 598 (Minn. App. 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Lillian Carletta Richardson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Jessica Jo Huntington Minn. Ct. App. 2020
A swindle “requires a showing of affirmative fraudulent or deceitful behavior.”
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Lee Setterstrom Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Theft by swindle requires the intent to defraud,” and “inherent in the intent requirement is that a swindler must act affirmatively to defraud another.”
State of Minnesota v. Jennifer Susan Kline Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Intent “[T]he essence of a swindle is d efrauding another person by an intentional misrepresentation or scheme.”
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Peter Pohl Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Philip Lee Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Philip Lee Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Virginia Marie Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Virginia Marie Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
another person by an intentional misrepresentation or scheme.”
State of Minnesota v. John F. Bonner, III Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. John F. Bonner, III Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jason Lonnie Gabbert Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jason Lonnie Gabbert Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[T]he essence of a swindle is defrauding another person by an intentional misrepresentation or scheme.”
State of Minnesota v. David Wayne Elvig Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. David Wayne Elvig Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Michael William Schneider Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Michael William Schneider Minn. Ct. App. 2014
d 592, 598 (Minn. App. 2003).
State v. Eibensteiner 690 N.W.2d 140 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Eibensteiner 690 N.W.2d 140 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In re the Welfare of C.M.A. 671 N.W.2d 597 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In Re CMA 671 N.W.2d 597 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In Re CMA 671 N.W.2d 597 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In re the Welfare of C.M.A. 671 N.W.2d 597 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
within a reasonable probability.” (quotation omitted).
State v. Pirsig 670 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Pirsig 670 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 2003