Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Ronquist, 600 N.W.2d 444.

29 citing documents.

A24-1308 Minn. Ct. App. 2025
When an indictment is constitutionally or statutorily required for a crime, “a prosecution in any other mode is unauthorized and an absolute nullity for want of jurisdiction.” (quoting 42 C.J.S.
State of Minnesota v. Jaye William Snyder Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jaye William Snyder Minn. 2024
The United States Supreme Court decisions in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), and Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), which limited the indictment requirement of Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure 17.01, subdivision 1, 1 to offenses punishable by life imprisonment before a sentencing enhancement based on a prior conviction is applied.
State of Minnesota v. Alvin Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Alvin Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2016
The Fifth Amendment right to a grand jury does not apply to state prosecutions, and Minnesota law does not require a grand jury indictment for first-degree criminal sexual conduct or second-degree assault with a dangerous weapon.
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle 881 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle 881 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2016
2 and 609.185(a)(1) (2002)”); (stating that appellant was convicted of “attempted criminal sexual conduct in the first-degree in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.342, subd.
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State v. Mayl 836 N.W.2d 368 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Mayl 836 N.W.2d 368 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. DeWalt 757 N.W.2d 282 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. DeWalt 757 N.W.2d 282 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
(providing detailed history of Minnesota law on serious offenses subject to charging by indictment).
State v. Johnson 756 N.W.2d 883 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Johnson 756 N.W.2d 883 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Turck 728 N.W.2d 544 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Turck 728 N.W.2d 544 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Roehrdanz v. Brill 682 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 2004
Roehrdanz v. Brill 682 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 2004
(stating that specific statutes govern' over1 general statutes); Nguyen v. State Farm Mut.
State v. Bluhm 676 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 2004
State v. Bluhm 676 N.W.2d 649 Minn. 2004
‘“When it cannot be said with certainty that the legislature intended to authorize the imposition of a minimum term or an extended term in a particular situation, the presumption must be that the legislature did not intend to do so.’ ” ().
State v. Lilleskov 658 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Lilleskov 658 N.W.2d 904 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
(holding that amendment requiring grand jury indictment did not merely clarify statute mandating life imprisonment for certain repeat sex offenders).
State v. Myers 627 N.W.2d 58 Minn. 2001
State v. Myers 627 N.W.2d 58 Minn. 2001
State v. Davisson 624 N.W.2d 292 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Davisson 624 N.W.2d 292 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(providing that statutory construction is a question of law).
State v. Ambaye 616 N.W.2d 256 Minn. 2000
State v. Ambaye 616 N.W.2d 256 Minn. 2000