Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Griller, 583 N.W.2d 736.

1129 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Soyan Mohamed-Rashid Abdirahman Minn. Ct. App. 2019
P. 31.02; (stating that this court has discretion to consider an alleged error absent an objection if 8 there is plain error affecting the appellant’s substantial rights).
State of Minnesota v. Timothy James Niedermayer Minn. Ct. App. 2019
An error affects a defendant’s substantial rights “if the error was prejudicial and affected the outcome of the case.”
State of Minnesota v. Abdiaziz Ali Adan Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“[B]efore an appellate court reviews an unobjected- to error, there must be (1) error; (2) that is plain; and (3) the error must affect substantial rights.”
Hunter Lee Briscoe v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Mohammad Beliad Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Jarrett Thomas Hill Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Marlow Vincent Labatte, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(stating that unobjected-to as sertions of error are reviewed for plain error).
State of Minnesota v. Sharmarke Sahal Musse Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Tanya Jo Eidhammer Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Scott Alan Klund Minn. Ct. App. 2019
An error is prejudicial if there is a “reasonable likelihood that the giving of the instruction in question would have had a significant effect on the verdict of the jury.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Corey Joe Mickelson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“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.” d 736, 740 (Minn. 1998).
State of Minnesota v. Darsche Chaudaun Wharry Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The third prong is “a heavy burden.”
State of Minnesota v. Jason Alan Beckstrand Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Albert Schally Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Thanantos Lee Ashing Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. James Earl Bailey Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Bee Forrest Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Bruce John Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Griller , d 736, 740 (Minn. 1998).
State of Minnesota v. Rondell Russell Camp Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“[B]efore an appellate court reviews an unobjected-to error, there must be (1) error; ( 2) t ha t i s pl a i n; a n d ( 3) t he error must affect substantial ri ghts.” State v. Griller
Steven James Hayes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Romeo Singh Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Dwayne Andre Garner Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Anthony John Sawina Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Duane John BlackBull Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota (A17-1993) (A17-1995) v. Deandre Martell Weaver (A17-1993) (A17-1995) Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Isiah Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2018
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.” (footnote omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Christian Anthony Schutz Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. George Anthony Woods Minn. Ct. App. 2018
An error affects an appellant’s substantial rights “if the error was prejudicial and affected the outcome of the case.” State v. Griller , (footnote omitted).
State of Minnesota v. John Bruce Steurer Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Daniel Kable Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Lester Corey Bates Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“If the state fails to demonstrate that substantial rights were not af fected, ‘the appellate court then assesses whether it should 6 address the error to ensure fairness and the integrity of the judicial proceedings.’” ().
State of Minnesota v. Raymond Valerian Jacobson, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Romeo Orlando Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Jallah Sallah Kollie Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(describing plain-error standard of review for unobjected-to errors).
State v. Barthman 917 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Barthman 917 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Strommen , , 686 (Minn. 2002) (citing State v. Griller , , 740 (Minn. 1998) ).
State of Minnesota v. Shane Lester Gullickson Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[B]efore an appellate court reviews an unobjected -to error, there must be (1) error; (2) that is plain; and (3) the error must affect substantial rights.” d 736, 740 (Minn. 1998).
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Michael Kuchenbecker Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Nathan Christopher Braun Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See State v. Griller , (reviewing an unobjected-to-issue for plain e rror).
State of Minnesota v. Michael Darnell Hampton Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Chad Nicholas Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Humberto Acevedo, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Raymond Smoot Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Kyle Grayling Tweed Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Luis Alberto Muniz Minn. Ct. App. 2018
If the three prongs of the plain-error test are met, an appellate co urt must then decide whether to “address the 4 error to ensure fairness and the integrity of the judicial proceedings.”
State of Minnesota v. Donyell Tyrone Roberts Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See State v. Griller , (stating that when a defendant fails to object to the admission of evidence, appellate courts review under the plain -error standard); see also State v. Ramey , 721 (stating that when a defendant fails to object to alleged prosecutorial misconduct, appellate cour
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Ruben Lucero Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Richard Thomas Bandow Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Yassin Ali Abdi Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“[B]efore an appellate court reviews an unobjected-to error, there must be (1) error; (2) that is plain; and (3) the erro r must affect substantial rights.” State v. Griller
State of Minnesota v. Geoffrey Robinson Minn. Ct. App. 2018