Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Coauette, 601 N.W.2d 443.

24 citing documents.

Connor Jerome Eischens, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Zane David Foley Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Zane David Foley Minn. Ct. App. 2024
d 443, 447 (Minn. App. 1999), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Raymond Allen Torgerson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Raymond Allen Torgerson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See, (observing that ordinary objects can be transformed into dangerous weapons and citing examples), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
An ordinary object may become a “dangerous weapon” if the object is dangerous and “used in a manner calculated to cause great bodily harm.” rev. denied (Minn. Dec .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(noting that, although reckless discharge of a paintball gun was insufficient to prove it was used as a dangerous weapon, aiming at someone’s face would provide “some basis to treat the paintball gun as a dangerous weapon ‘in t he manner it is used’”), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Joshua David Donson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Joshua David Donson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
5 BB pellets are made to “pierce and harm the objects struck—whether bird, rodent, or human.” review denied (Minn. Dec.
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Karau Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Karau Minn. Ct. App. 2016
See, (noting that “[o]rdinary objects can .
State of Minnesota v. David Lee Haywood 869 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. David Lee Haywood 869 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
n.2 (Minn. App. 1999) (“Although courts can and have pieced together a definition of ‘firearm’ for use in the criminal code, this case, as have others, indicates the need for the legislature to craft a clarifying amendment to Minn. Stat. ch. 609, with a focus on whether the meaning of ‘firearm’ can be precise
Freeman v. State 804 N.W.2d 144 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
Freeman v. State 804 N.W.2d 144 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
review denied (Minn. Dec.
In Re the Welfare of V.D.M. 623 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re the Welfare of V.D.M. 623 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
“The objective of statutory interpretation is to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the legislature.” (citations omitted), review denied (Minn. Dec.
Improvement of County Ditch No. 86, Branch 1, County of Blue Earth v. Phillips 614 N.W.2d 756 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Improvement of County Ditch No. 86, Branch 1, County of Blue Earth v. Phillips 614 N.W.2d 756 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“The objective of statutory interpretation is to ascertain and effectuate the intent of the legislature.” (Minn.App.
Smith v. State 615 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Smith v. State 615 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
review denied (Minn. Dec.
State v. Tomlin 609 N.W.2d 282 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Tomlin 609 N.W.2d 282 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
review denied (Minn. Dec.