Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Griller, 583 N.W.2d 736.
- Blue Earth County State of Minnesota v. Lee Wayne Young, Jr. Procaccini, J. Dissenting, Hudson, C.J., Thissen, J Minn. 2026
- Crow Wing County State of Minnesota v. Michael Lee LaFlex Thissen, J. Concurring in part, dissenting in part, … Minn. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Lawrence Sepan Wilson
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
An error affects a defendant’s substantial rights if it “was prejudicial and affected the outcome of the case.”
- State of Minnesota v. Daniel Alexander Albert Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Jimmy Alexander Gogoi Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
Court of Appeals State of Minnesota v. Ge Yang Gaïtas, J. Dissenting, Moore, III, McKeig, Hennesy, JJ
Minn. 2026
An error affects a defendant’s substantial rights if it “was prejudicial and affected the outcome of the case.”
- State of Minnesota v. Tracey Dee Keyes Minn. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Ahmed Ali Abdi Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Alexandra Jean Phillippi Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Jeremiah Marquis Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Nathan Taylor Sheldon
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
had a significant effect on the verdict.”
- State of Minnesota v. Dru Alexander Barrow Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- Donavon Dexter Boone v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Patrick Jay Sullivan Minn. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Jerson Manuel Montes Banegas Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Steven Douglas Nelson
Minn. 2026
The plain-error exception allows an appellate court to review an error that was not objected to at trial if the district court committed “(1) error; (2) that is plain; and (3) the error must affect substantial rights.” (citing Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 466–67 (1997)).
- State of Minnesota v. Shawn Louis Boit Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Juan Ramirez, Jr.
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“If these three prongs are met, the appellate court then assesses whether it should address the error to ensure fairness and the integrity of the judicial proceedings.”
-
Cedric Lamont Berry v. State of Minnesota
Minn. 2026
affect[ed] substantial rights.” see also Gilleylen, d at 280.
- Jason Lee Martin v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
Timothy James Hirchert v. State of Minnesota
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
2 A defendant demonstrates that a plain error affected their substantial rights by showing that “the error was prejudicial and affected the outcome of the case.”
- State of Minnesota v. Shawn Michael Tillman Minn. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Deshon Israel Bonnell Minn. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Deshon Israel Bonnell Minn. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Jaisden Harold-Dru Hanners Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Jaisden Harold-Dru Hanners Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Lee Hill Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Rodney Allan Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Nicholas Lee Hill Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Rodney Allan Williams Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Deanna Lea King
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“In order to meet the plain error standard, a criminal defendant must show that (1) there was an error, (2) the error was plain, and (3) the error affected the defendant’s substantial rights.”
- State of Minnesota v. Patrick Michael Remer Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Ajee Arylce King
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“If these three prongs are met, the appellate court then assesses whether it should address the error to ensure fairness and the integrity of the judicial proceedings.”
- State of Minnesota v. Dustin Timothy Cloud Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- Ashaunti Quantay Prowell v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
- Ashaunti Quantay Prowell v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Jamaal Terrance Tanna
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(citing Johnson v. United States, 520 U.S. 461, 466-67 (1997)).
- State of Minnesota v. Travis Joel Bauer Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- State of Minnesota v. Roberto Ortega-Herrera Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- In the Matter of the Welfare of: E. J. C. L., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2025
-
In the Matter of the Welfare of: E. J. C. L., Child
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“In order to meet the plain error standard, a criminal defendant must show that (1) there was an error, (2) the error was plain, and (3) the error affected the defendant’s substantial rights.” ().
- Edward Lee Jones v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- Edward Lee Jones v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- State of Minnesota v. Abdusalam Omar Hussein Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- State of Minnesota v. Abdusalam Omar Hussein Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- Jeramy John Wharton v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- State of Minnesota v. Nelson Randolph, III Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- State of Minnesota v. Sherrie Elizabeth Smetana Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- State of Minnesota v. Djamil Vagif Abiyev Minn. Ct. App. 2025
- State of Minnesota v. Jacob James Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2025