Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Litzau, 650 N.W.2d 177.

135 citing documents.

State v. Clark 722 N.W.2d 460 Minn. 2006
State v. Clark 722 N.W.2d 460 Minn. 2006
An accused “ ‘is entitled to a fair trial, and it is the duty of the court, and of prosecuting counsel as well, to see that he gets one.’ ” , 185 n. 6 (Minn.2002) (quoting State v. Haney, 222 Minn. 124, 125 , ).
State v. Caulfield 722 N.W.2d 304 Minn. 2006
State v. Caulfield 722 N.W.2d 304 Minn. 2006
We have said, “Where the evidence was aimed at having an impact on the verdict, we cannot say that the verdict was surely unattributable to the error.”
State v. Green 719 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 2006
State v. Green 719 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 2006
Although we approved of this instruction in State v. McLaughlin, 250 Minn. 309, 319 , -72 (1957), in Val-tierra we concluded: Flight instructions are a species of permissive-inference instruction, and the factors leading us to reject such instructions in [State v.] Litzau, ] and [State v.] Olson[, ] apply with full force to flight instructions.
State v. Medal-Mendoza 718 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2006
State v. Medal-Mendoza 718 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2006
But, in more recent cases we have instructed the district courts to avoid “jury instructions advising that a particular fact may be inferred from other particular facts, if proved.” -86 (Minn.2002) (holding reversal warranted where a permissive inference instruction on possession of a controlled substance contributed to the cumulative prejudicial effect of the errors in defendant’s trial); -16 (Minn.1992) (holding it was reversible error to give the
State v. Valtierra 718 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 2006
State v. Valtierra 718 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 2006
But in two more recent cases, we have instructed that district courts should avoid “jury instructions advising that a particular fact may be inferred from other particular facts, if proved.” -87 (Minn.2002) (holding that the trial court erred by giving an instruction that the jury could infer that the driver of a vehicle possessed a drug found in his vehicle, and holding that the “cumulative effect” of this error and others merited reversal); -16 (Minn.1992)
State v. Osborne 715 N.W.2d 436 Minn. 2006
State v. Harris 713 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 2006
State v. Harris 713 N.W.2d 844 Minn. 2006
State v. Wembley 712 N.W.2d 783 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Wembley 712 N.W.2d 783 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Gillespie 710 N.W.2d 289 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Gillespie 710 N.W.2d 289 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Bobadilla 709 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2006
State v. Bobadilla 709 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2006
State v. Burrell 697 N.W.2d 579 Minn. 2005
State v. Burrell 697 N.W.2d 579 Minn. 2005
State v. Martin 695 N.W.2d 578 Minn. 2005
State v. Martin 695 N.W.2d 578 Minn. 2005
State v. DeRosier 695 N.W.2d 97 Minn. 2005
State v. DeRosier 695 N.W.2d 97 Minn. 2005
State v. Fields 679 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2004
State v. Fields 679 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2004
State v. Jones 678 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2004
State v. Jones 678 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2004
State v. DeShay 669 N.W.2d 878 Minn. 2003
State v. DeShay 669 N.W.2d 878 Minn. 2003
” , 185 n. 6 (Minn.2002) (quoting State v. Haney, 222 Minn. 124, 125 , ).
State v. Manley 664 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 2003
State v. Manley 664 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 2003
State v. Quick 659 N.W.2d 701 Minn. 2003
State v. Quick 659 N.W.2d 701 Minn. 2003