Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Scruggs, 421 N.W.2d 707.

115 citing documents.

State v. Walthers 620 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Walthers 620 N.W.2d 727 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Johnson 616 N.W.2d 720 Minn. 2000
State v. Robledo-Kinney 615 N.W.2d 25 Minn. 2000
State v. Robledo-Kinney 615 N.W.2d 25 Minn. 2000
“[A] presumption of regularity attaches to [an] indictment, and it is a rare case where an indictment will be invalidated.”
State v. Waino 611 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Waino 611 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“This court will not reverse a trial court’s admission of evidence of other crimes or bad acts unless an abuse of discretion is clearly shown.”
State v. Morris 606 N.W.2d 430 Minn. 2000
State v. Morris 606 N.W.2d 430 Minn. 2000
“In a criminal case, the court makes a painstaking review of the record to determine if the evidence was sufficient to permit the jury to reach the conclusion that it did.”
State v. Sewell 595 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Sewell 595 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Greenleaf 591 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1999
State v. Greenleaf 591 N.W.2d 488 Minn. 1999
State v. Lynch 590 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 1999
State v. Lynch 590 N.W.2d 75 Minn. 1999
State v. Ascheman 589 N.W.2d 486 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Ascheman 589 N.W.2d 486 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Aubid 578 N.W.2d 784 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Aubid 578 N.W.2d 784 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
(evidence that defendant participated in robbery admissible without notice in murder trial in which prosecution alleged defendant killed victim out of belief that victim gave information to police about defendant’s role in robbery).
State v. Whittaker 568 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1997
State v. Whittaker 568 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1997
State v. Ford 539 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 1995
State v. Ford 539 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 1995
State v. Flournoy 535 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1995
State v. Flournoy 535 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1995
State v. Roan 532 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 1995
State v. Roan 532 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 1995
717 *570 (Minn.1988); Minn.R.Crim.P.
State v. Porter 526 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1995
State v. Porter 526 N.W.2d 359 Minn. 1995
-16 (Minn.1988) (citing State v. Johnson, 307 Minn. 501, 509 , ).
State v. Steinbuch 514 N.W.2d 793 Minn. 1994
State v. Steinbuch 514 N.W.2d 793 Minn. 1994
State v. Stewart 514 N.W.2d 559 Minn. 1994
State v. Stewart 514 N.W.2d 559 Minn. 1994
State v. Opsahl 513 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 1994
State v. Opsahl 513 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 1994
State v. Plummer 511 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Plummer 511 N.W.2d 36 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
ANALYSIS “A grand jury proceeding is not a trial on the merits, and jurors do not determine guilt or innocence, but rather determine if there is probable cause to believe the accused has committed the crime.”
State v. Bates 507 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Bates 507 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Stewart 486 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Stewart 486 N.W.2d 444 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
18.06; -17 (Minn.1988); State v. Kasherman, 177 Minn. 200, 201 , 224 N.W.
Scruggs v. State 484 N.W.2d 21 Minn. 1992
Scruggs v. State 484 N.W.2d 21 Minn. 1992
State v. Russell 481 N.W.2d 148 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Russell 481 N.W.2d 148 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
(once defendant has been convicted, he bears a heavy burden in seeking to overturn an indictment).
State v. Pilcher 472 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1991
State v. Pilcher 472 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1991
State v. Smith 464 N.W.2d 730 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Smith 464 N.W.2d 730 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
-16 (Minn.1988) (citations omitted).
State v. Johnson 463 N.W.2d 527 Minn. 1990