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. Daniels, 332 N.W.2d 172.

90 citing documents.

  • State v. Skjefte 428 N.W.2d 91 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Skjefte 428 N.W.2d 91 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Rean 421 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 1988
  • State v. Rean 421 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 1988
    (reversing an award of new trial by court of appeals; dealing with issues of failure to object and of whether error in denying or granting a jury request is prejudicial); (analyzing in detail what is the scope of the trial court’s considerable discretion in handling such requests and also analyzing issue of when error is prejudicial); (the rare “close case” where trial court’s refusal to reread testimony was so prejudicial and
  • State v. Rean 416 N.W.2d 790 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Rean 416 N.W.2d 790 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    (court would have had to read testimony from five witnesses); (court would have to read nearly half of total trial testimony); d at 878 (abuse of discretion to deny jury request for defendant’s testimony, 35 pages out of
  • State v. Bias 419 N.W.2d 480 Minn. 1988
  • State v. Bias 419 N.W.2d 480 Minn. 1988
  • State v. King 414 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. King 414 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Champion 413 N.W.2d 161 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Champion 413 N.W.2d 161 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Wedan v. State 409 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Wedan v. State 409 N.W.2d 266 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Tuomi 396 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Tuomi 396 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Perkins 395 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Perkins 395 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we find there was sufficient evidence to convict *732 Perkins for fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct.
  • State v. Wahl 394 N.W.2d 536 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Wahl 394 N.W.2d 536 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Collins v. State 385 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • Collins v. State 385 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    In reviewing claims that the evidence was insufficient to sustain a jury’s finding of guilt, the sole issue before this court is “whether the jury could reasonably have found the defendant guilty viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict.”
  • State v. Sanoski 377 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Sanoski 377 N.W.2d 503 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. McMorris 373 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 1985
  • State v. McMorris 373 N.W.2d 593 Minn. 1985
    For an analysis of the scope of the trial court’s discretion under the rule
  • State v. Stephani 369 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Stephani 369 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. McMorris 367 N.W.2d 664 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. McMorris 367 N.W.2d 664 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Farr 357 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Farr 357 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Winship 355 N.W.2d 324 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Winship 355 N.W.2d 324 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Stokes 354 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Stokes 354 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Belfry 353 N.W.2d 224 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Belfry 353 N.W.2d 224 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Jackson 346 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Jackson 346 N.W.2d 634 Minn. 1984
    Cases bearing on a determination of prejudice in this context include: (delay in disclosing exculpatory evidence held nonprejudicial); (failure to disclose a police report before trial and subsequent use of it to impeach a defense witness on cross-examination was nonprejudicial violation of the disclosure rules); (delay in disclosing evidence held nonprejudicial); (