DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Nunn, 351 N.W.2d 16.

25 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
    “[T]heft is a lesser included offense of aggravated robbery.” State v. McClenton , ( rev. denied (Minn. Mar.
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
    And this court has previously determined that “the ft is a lesser-included offense of aggravated robbery.” State v. McClenton , 7 (Minn. App. 2010), review denied (Minn. June 29, 2010); see also State v. Nunn
  • Adnan Mohamed Ali, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
    (citing State v. Nunn , ).
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
  • Berry Alan Willis, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
    See Moore, d at 738 (concluding that a directed verdict on an element of an offense requires reversal); see also Rose v. Clark, 478 U.S. 570, 578, 106 S. Ct. 3101, 3106 (1986) (indicating that “harmless-error analysis presumably would not apply if a court directed a verdict for the prosecution in a criminal trial by jury”); State v. Nunn , (concluding that it was fundamental error for the di strict court to inform the ju ry that a robbery occurred, where it was “an essential element of the o ffe
  • State v. McClenton 781 N.W.2d 181 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
  • State v. McClenton 781 N.W.2d 181 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
    Thus, theft is a lesser included offense of aggravated robbery.” (citation omitted); (agreeing with Nunn’s reasoning that theft “is a lesser included offense *188 of aggravated robbery”).
  • State v. Starfield 472 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. Starfield 472 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. Nunn 399 N.W.2d 193 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Nunn 399 N.W.2d 193 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Stanifer 382 N.W.2d 213 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Stanifer 382 N.W.2d 213 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Edwards 380 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Edwards 380 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Coleman 373 N.W.2d 777 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Coleman 373 N.W.2d 777 Minn. 1985
    The Court of Appeals, in concluding that theft by swindle is a lesser included offense of aggravated robbery
  • State v. Coleman 356 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Coleman 356 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    we held that it was reversible error for the trial court to instruct the jury on aggravated robbery but refuse defendant’s request for an instruction on the lesser-included offense of theft when theft was the essence of defendant’s theory of the case.
  • State v. Jensen 356 N.W.2d 374 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Jensen 356 N.W.2d 374 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    -19 (Minn.Ct.App.1984) ().
  • State v. Hines 354 N.W.2d 91 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Hines 354 N.W.2d 91 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Rose 353 N.W.2d 565 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Rose 353 N.W.2d 565 Minn. Ct. App. 1984