Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Heithecker, 395 N.W.2d 382.

24 citing documents.

In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Craig Seitzer. Minn. Ct. App. 2026
1 (stating that appellant “shall” provide the transcript of proceedings for appellate review); (“Without a trial transcript, it is impossible to judge the merits of appellant’s case.”).
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Samuel Omwando Nyaboga. Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(“Without a trial transcript, it is impossible to judge the merits of appellant’s case.”); Minn. R. Civ.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See Raleigh, d at 94 (requiring the defendant to bear the burden of showing that his guilty plea was inaccurate); see also State v. Heithecker , (noting that it is appellant’s burden to provide an adequate record on appeal ).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See Hough, d at 397 (stating that the district court is in “the best position to evaluate the offender’s conduct and weigh sentencing options”); see also State v. Axford , -94 (Minn. 1987) (requiring a sufficient trial record before a reviewing court can properly address issues on appeal); (affirming the district court because the appellant failed to provide a trial transcript on appeal, and without a trial transcript it was impossible to judge the merits of the appeal).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See, (declining to consider issues because appellant failed to provide trial transcript necessary for appellate review).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
1(a) ; State v. Heithecker , .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 382, 383 (Minn. App. 1986).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Heithecker , (providing that we may decline to review an issue when an appellant does not fulfill his responsibility to provide us with a transcript).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See, e.g., State v. Heithecker , (declining to consider issue where appellant failed to provide trial transcript necessary for appellate review); Minn. R. Civ.
State of Minnesota v. Chad William Mosher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Chad William Mosher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
See, (affirming appellant’s conviction because he failed to provide the trial transcript necessary to review his sufficiency-of-the-evidence claim).
State of Minnesota v. Jose Manuel Ortiz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jose Manuel Ortiz Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Bobbie Teeple v. Estate of Dylan Cox Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Bobbie Teeple v. Estate of Dylan Cox Minn. Ct. App. 2015
15, 2011); d 924, 925 (Minn. App. 1986).
State of Minnesota v. Ali John Moin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ali John Moin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jeremiah Allen Brooks Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jeremiah Allen Brooks Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. David Lamar Everett, and David Lamar Everett v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. David Lamar Everett, and David Lamar Everett v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
When an appellant fails to provide this court with a transcript necessary for review of the issues raised on appeal, “the decision below must be 11 affirmed.”
Richards Asphalt Co. v. Bunge Corp. 399 N.W.2d 188 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Richards Asphalt Co. v. Bunge Corp. 399 N.W.2d 188 Minn. Ct. App. 1987