Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Crocker, 409 N.W.2d 840.

60 citing documents.

Douglas Edward Simpson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The supreme court reasoned that documentary evidence of “a prior conviction is obviously the most efficient method of proof of a prior offense under Rule 404(b).” -44 (Minn. 1987) (quotation omitted) (concluding that “it was entirely proper for the [district] court to allow the state to use certified court records to prove” a prior criminal-sexual-conduct conviction and affirming the district court’s admission of testimony that Crocker attempted to sexually assault his
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Bolte, d at 198 (emphasizing the strength of the state’s evidence); see also Griffin , d at 262 (noting the “considerable” evidence of defendant’s guilt as part of harmless error analysis); State v. Crocker , (noting that the state’s evidenc e was “very strong”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Theodore Pierre Jerry 864 N.W.2d 365 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Theodore Pierre Jerry 864 N.W.2d 365 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State v. Juarez 837 N.W.2d 473 Minn. 2013
State v. Juarez 837 N.W.2d 473 Minn. 2013
(citing State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119 , ).
State v. Wright 719 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2006
State v. Wright 719 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2006
1 Christopher B. Mueller & Laird C. Kirkpat *917 rick, Federal Evidence § 109, 616 & n. 3 (2d ed.1994); (citing first edition of Treatise).
State v. Ness 707 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 2006
State v. Rannow 703 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Rannow 703 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Welch 675 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 2004
State v. Welch 675 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 2004
This conclusion also embraces the reasoning and concerns set forth in our established precedent that kidnapping convictions may unfairly exaggerate “the criminality of a defendant’s conduct in those cases where the confinement was completely incidental to the crime committed during the course of kidnapping.” see also State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 128-24
State v. Smith 669 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 2003
State v. Smith 669 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 2003
Following that statutory change in sentencing, a case in which the victim was moved from the living room into an adjacent bedroom before she was raped.
Neal v. State 658 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2003
Neal v. State 658 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2003
State v. Budreau 641 N.W.2d 919 Minn. 2002
State v. Budreau 641 N.W.2d 919 Minn. 2002
Cooper v. State 565 N.W.2d 27 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Cooper v. State 565 N.W.2d 27 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
(recognizing statute permitting separate sentence for kidnapping would allow unfair exaggeration of criminality of defendant’s conduct where confinement is completely incidental to connected crime, if not for presumption that kidnapping sentence runs concurrently).
State v. Head 561 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
State v. Head 561 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
1059 -60, 127 L.Ed.2d 380 (1994); , 843^14 (Minn.1987) (after district court ruled evidence of prior crime admissible, defense counsel said “no objection” to using certified copy of conviction and other papers, including complaint, to prove conviction; district court properly allowed state to use certified court papers to prove prior offense).
State v. Butterfield 555 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Butterfield 555 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
(multiple sentences can unfairly exaggerate criminality of defendant’s conduct when confinement is connected solely to crimes committed during course of kidnapping).
State v. Sebasky 547 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Alt 529 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Alt 529 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
The supreme court, however, approved the presentation of a -44 (Minn.1987).
State v. Bolte 530 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1995
State v. Bolte 530 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1995
See, -44 (Minn.1987) (holding that a certified copy of a prior conviction may be admitted to prove the prior offense pursuant to Rule 404(b)).
State v. Branson 529 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Branson 529 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
in which the supreme court specifically considered section 609.251 and stated that sentences are presumed concurrent even for crimes committed during a kidnapping.
State v. Henriksen 522 N.W.2d 928 Minn. 1994
State v. Henriksen 522 N.W.2d 928 Minn. 1994
404(b) would be satisfied on retrial, -44 (Minn.1987), and the jury would again hear evidence of the defendant’s prior act of arson against C.S.
State v. Buhl 520 N.W.2d 177 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Buhl 520 N.W.2d 177 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
See e.g., Moorman, d at 601 ; DeWald, d at 504 ; -15 (Minn.1990); Norris, d at 69 ; -44 (Minn.1987); -03 (Minn.1984); (Minn.App.
State v. Johnson 514 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1994
State v. Johnson 514 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 1994
State v. Halvorson 506 N.W.2d 331 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
Overruled State v. Halvorson 506 N.W.2d 331 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Poole 499 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1993
State v. Poole 499 N.W.2d 31 Minn. 1993
(“[W]e have generally required that the other crime be similar in some way — either in time, location, or modus operandi — to the charged offense, although this, of course, is not an absolute necessity.”)
State v. Swanson 498 N.W.2d 435 Minn. 1993
State v. Wermerskirchen 497 N.W.2d 235 Minn. 1993
State v. Wermerskirchen 497 N.W.2d 235 Minn. 1993
where, in the prosecution of the defendant for raping a college student, we upheld the admission of evidence that 9 years earlier, in 1977, the defendant had sexually assaulted a 7-year-old girl.
Dunn v. State 486 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 1992
Dunn v. State 486 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 1992
See State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 121
State v. Frisinger 484 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1992
State v. Frisinger 484 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1992
On the issue of the admissibility of a conviction to establish a prior offense, see, -44 (Minn.1987).