Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Rhodes, 627 N.W.2d 74.
- State v. Richardson 670 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2003
-
State v. Richardson
670 N.W.2d 267
Minn. 2003
On appeal, Richardson bears the burden of proving that the admission of these statements was erroneous; we will not reverse “absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
- Doe v. F.P., Diocese of Winona 667 N.W.2d 493 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
-
Doe v. F.P., Diocese of Winona
667 N.W.2d 493
Minn. Ct. App. 2003
See, (basing determination that communication was not protected by clergy privilege in part on finding that content of communication was not religious); (basing determination that clergy privilege did not apply on finding that content of communication was not
- Sessions v. State 666 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 2003
-
Sessions v. State
666 N.W.2d 718
Minn. 2003
A petitioner must allege facts that “if proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence, entitle him to relief.” ().
- King v. State 649 N.W.2d 149 Minn. 2002
-
King v. State
649 N.W.2d 149
Minn. 2002
Conversely, an evidentiary hearing is necessary “ ‘whenever material facts are in dispute that * * * must be resolved in order to determine the issues raised on the merits.’ ” ().
- Shoen v. State 648 N.W.2d 228 Minn. 2002
-
Shoen v. State
648 N.W.2d 228
Minn. 2002
2052 , 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984)
- State v. Lee 645 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 2002
- State v. Lee 645 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 2002
- Ferguson v. State 645 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 2002
- Ferguson v. State 645 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 2002
- State v. Stewart 643 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2002
- State v. Stewart 643 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2002