Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Kinsky, 348 N.W.2d 319.
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“Prospective jurors cannot be presumed partial solely on the ground of exposure to pretrial publicity.” (citations omitted).
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- State of Minnesota v. Antonio Joseph Deluney Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Joseph Deluney
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“If a person can commit the greater offense, as legally defined, without committing the lesser offense, as legally defined, then the lesser offense is not necessarily included within the greater offense.”
- State v. St. John 847 N.W.2d 704 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-
State v. St. John
847 N.W.2d 704
Minn. Ct. App. 2014
An offense is not an included offense if “a person can commit the greater offense, as legally defined, without committing the lesser offense, as legally defined.”
- State v. Fairbanks 842 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 2014
- State v. Fairbanks 842 N.W.2d 297 Minn. 2014
- State v. HEIGES 779 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
-
State v. HEIGES
779 N.W.2d 904
Minn. Ct. App. 2010
(holding that the vehicular homicide statute’s definition of “human being” does not include a viable fetus); -25 (Minn.1984) (affirming a murder conviction where evidence established that infant was “born alive and had an independent and separate existence from its mother”); but see Boyd v. Minnesota, 274 F.3d 497 , 501 n. 4 (8th Cir.2001) (noting that supreme court has never formally adopted a “born alive” rule).
- State v. Evans 756 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 2008
-
State v. Evans
756 N.W.2d 854
Minn. 2008
Evans has offered “no evidence suggesting that the pretrial publicity surrounding [his] case affected any of the jurors who sat on [his] case or that the denial of [his] change of venue motion resulted in actual prejudice to [him].” Id.; (concluding that, even though three jurors “admitted to having formed impressions about defendant’s guilt from the pretrial publicity,” the district court was in the best position to evaluate each juror’s claim that he or she could be impartial, and an appellate
- State v. Blom 682 N.W.2d 578 Minn. 2004
-
State v. Blom
682 N.W.2d 578
Minn. 2004
(reviewing a district court’s ruling on change of venue and continuance motions for a clear abuse of discretion); State v. Morgan, 310 Minn. 88, 95 , (reviewing a district court’s decision on- sequestration and continuance motions for abuse of discretion).
- State v. Warren 592 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1999
-
State v. Warren
592 N.W.2d 440
Minn. 1999
1639 , 6 L.Ed.2d 751 (1961)
- State v. Chambers 589 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1999
- State v. Chambers 589 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1999
- State v. Walen 563 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1997
- State v. Walen 563 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1997
- State v. Drieman 457 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1990
- State v. Drieman 457 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 1990
- State v. Roden 380 N.W.2d 520 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Roden 380 N.W.2d 520 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Stanifer 382 N.W.2d 213 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
-
State v. Stanifer
382 N.W.2d 213
Minn. Ct. App. 1986
* * * If, after comparing the elements of each offense, “a person can commit the greater offense, as legally defined, without committing the lesser offense, as legally defined, the lesser offense is not necessarily included within the greater offense.” -81 (Minn.1985) ( ).
- State v. Soto 378 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1985
- State v. Soto 378 N.W.2d 625 Minn. 1985
- State v. Gerring 378 N.W.2d 94 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- State v. Gerring 378 N.W.2d 94 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- State v. Coleman 373 N.W.2d 777 Minn. 1985
- State v. Coleman 373 N.W.2d 777 Minn. 1985
- State v. Buschkopf 373 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1985
- State v. Buschkopf 373 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1985
- State v. Coleman 356 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
- State v. Coleman 356 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 1984