DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Scales, 518 N.W.2d 587.

155 citing documents.

  • In Re the Welfare of G.S.P. 610 N.W.2d 651 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
  • State v. Smallwood 594 N.W.2d 144 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Smallwood 594 N.W.2d 144 Minn. 1999
    He also sought to have his statements suppressed because Robideau turned off the tape recorder during his questioning of Smallwood, (requiring that all custodial interrogations shall be electronically recorded where feasible).
  • State v. Munson 594 N.W.2d 128 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Munson 594 N.W.2d 128 Minn. 1999
    the trial court committed reversible error in: (1) admitting evidence seized in searches of a vehicle and a residence because the searches were unsupported by probable cause and unreasonable in scope and duration; and (2) admitting a requiring all custodial statements to be electronically recorded.
  • State v. Doerr 969 P.2d 1168 Ariz. 1998
  • State v. Hendrickson 584 N.W.2d 774 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • State v. Hendrickson 584 N.W.2d 774 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • State v. Wiernasz 584 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Wiernasz 584 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1998
    There is no real dispute in this case concerning the facts relating to the circumstances of the interrogation
  • State v. Edrozo 578 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Edrozo 578 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 1998
    The trial court ruled that the statements should be excluded under Scales, which requires that “all custodial interrogation including any information about rights, any waiver of those rights, and all questioning shall be electronically recorded where feasible and must be recorded when questioning occurs at a place of detention.”
  • State v. Miller 573 N.W.2d 661 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Miller 573 N.W.2d 661 Minn. 1998
    May 14 and (5) certain trial testimony regarding the likelihood that he killed his mother, his bad acts, and prior felonies was admitted in error.
  • State v. Edrozo 567 N.W.2d 59 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
  • State v. Edrozo 567 N.W.2d 59 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
    Further, the Minnesota Supreme Court has held that “all custodial interrogation shall be electronically recorded where feasible and must be recorded when questioning occurs at a place of detention.”
  • State v. Jones 566 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Jones 566 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Coleman 563 N.W.2d 73 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Coleman 563 N.W.2d 73 Minn. 1997
    The court of appeals in the instant case held, inter alia, that a may be used by the state to impeach a defendant’s inconsistent testimony at trial even where the statement may not be used by the state in its case-in-chief.
  • State v. Dominguez-Ramirez 563 N.W.2d 245 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Dominguez-Ramirez 563 N.W.2d 245 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Long 562 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Long 562 N.W.2d 292 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Schroeder 560 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
  • State v. Schroeder 560 N.W.2d 739 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
  • State v. Coleman 560 N.W.2d 717 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
  • State v. Coleman 560 N.W.2d 717 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
    All custodial interrogation “must be recorded when questioning occurs at a place of detention” or else any custodial statements “may be suppressed at trial.”
  • State v. George 557 N.W.2d 575 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Critt 554 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
  • State v. Critt 554 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
  • State v. Sims 553 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
  • State v. Sims 553 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
    (prospective only application of recording requirement); (prospective only application of sentencing rules); see also Turner v. IDS Financial Servs., Inc., (court’s rulings are purely prospective only in very limited si
  • State v. Lopez 538 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • State v. Lopez 538 N.W.2d 705 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    In this consolidated appeal from three separate DWI convictions, appellants challenge the trial court’s denial of their motions to exclude evidence obtained after unrecorded implied consent advisories were given, based *706 on its holding that the reading of an implied consent advisory is not a
  • State v. Ford 539 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Ford 539 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 1995
    Ford contends the trial court should have suppressed the statements he made on November 17 and November 25, 1992, because (a) reh’g denied (Minn. Aug.
  • State v. Gilmartin 535 N.W.2d 650 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • State v. Gilmartin 535 N.W.2d 650 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    In this appeal from a pretrial suppression order, the state argues the district court erred in determining that a
  • State v. Logan 535 N.W.2d 320 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Logan 535 N.W.2d 320 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Wilson 535 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Wilson 535 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Williams 535 N.W.2d 277 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Williams 535 N.W.2d 277 Minn. 1995
    reh’g denied (Minn., Aug.
  • Umphlett v. Commissioner of Public Safety 533 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
  • Umphlett v. Commissioner of Public Safety 533 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
    Appellant Timothy Wayne Umphlett challenges the district court’s order sustaining the revocation of his driver’s license, arguing that (1) he was denied an opportunity for an additional test, (2) his limited right to counsel was not vindicated because he was not given a reasonable time to contact an attorney, and (3) (requiring police officers to record custodial interrogation of suspects) should apply to implied consent proceedings.
  • State v. Roan 532 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Roan 532 N.W.2d 563 Minn. 1995
    this court held that “all custodial interrogation including any information about rights, any waiver of those rights, and all questioning shall be electronically recorded where feasible and must be recorded when questioning occurs at a place of detention.” We clearly stated that the rule established
  • State v. Thaggard 527 N.W.2d 804 Minn. 1995