Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Aubid, 591 N.W.2d 472.

27 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Finally, the admission of B.M.’s voluntary statements directly implicating appellant promotes the “growth and development of the law of evidence to the end that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings j ustly determined.” See State v. Aubid , (quoting Minn. R. Evid.
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2020
For the third requirement of the rule , we hold that the admission of L.P.’s statements was in accordance with the general purpose of the rules, which is to “ secure fairness and ‘to promote the growth and development of the law of evidence to the end that the truth may be ascertained and proceedings justly determined.’ ” Hallmark, d at 294 ( quoting State v. Aubid , ).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“[T]he standard for critical impact is that the lack of the suppressed evidence significantly reduces the likelihood of a successful prosecution.” (discussing the critical -impact standard).
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
State v. Aubid , , 479 (Minn. 1999) (quoting Minn. R. Evid.
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Julian Sanchez-Sanchez 879 N.W.2d 324 Minn. 2016
Bobo v. State 820 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 2012
Bobo v. State 820 N.W.2d 511 Minn. 2012
“Hearsay is an out-of-court statement offered to prove the truth of the matter asserted.” see also Minn. R. Evid.
State v. Obeta 796 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2011
State v. Fields 679 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2004
State v. Fields 679 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2004
State v. Johnson 679 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Johnson 679 N.W.2d 169 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Martinez 657 N.W.2d 600 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Martinez 657 N.W.2d 600 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. King 622 N.W.2d 800 Minn. 2001
State v. King 622 N.W.2d 800 Minn. 2001
State v. Martin 614 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 2000
State v. Martin 614 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 2000
-41 (Minn.1999); -96 (Minn.1999); -77 (Minn.1999).
State v. Reckinger 603 N.W.2d 331 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Reckinger 603 N.W.2d 331 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Richmond 602 N.W.2d 647 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Richmond 602 N.W.2d 647 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Martin 591 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1999
State v. Martin 591 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1999
Facts A and will not be repeated here.