Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Currie, 400 N.W.2d 361.

24 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State v. Currie , , rev. denied (Minn. April 17, 1987).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
-66 (Minn. App. 1987), review denied (Minn. 1987).
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
State v. Barner 510 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 1993
State v. Barner 510 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 1993
for rev. denied (Minn.1985); pet.
State v. Danowit 497 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Danowit 497 N.W.2d 636 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Jennings 487 N.W.2d 536 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Jennings 487 N.W.2d 536 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Gerald 486 N.W.2d 799 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Gerald 486 N.W.2d 799 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
366 (Minn.App.1987) (numerous scars on the backs of child victims supported conclusion that defendant inflicted great bodily harm), pet.
State v. Elvin 481 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Elvin 481 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 469 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
Minnesota Chamber of Commerce v. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency 469 N.W.2d 100 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
The Normandale Properties court also addressed the use of hypothetical situations when reviewing a statute for vagueness: The person charged must show the statute “lacks specificity as to his own behavior and not as to some hypothetical situation.” Normandale Properties, d at 262 ( pet.
State v. Williams 451 N.W.2d 886 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
State v. Williams 451 N.W.2d 886 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
Consequently, Williams must show that the malicious punishment statute “lacks specificity as to his own behavior and not as to some hypothetical situation.” pet.
State v. Normandale Properties, Inc. 420 N.W.2d 259 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Normandale Properties, Inc. 420 N.W.2d 259 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
The person charged must show the statute “lacks specificity as to his own behavior and not as to some hypothetical situation.” pet.
State v. Gerring 418 N.W.2d 517 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Gerring 418 N.W.2d 517 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
The person charged must show the statute “lacks specificity as to his own behavior and not as to some hypothetical situation.” pet.
State v. Ostlund 416 N.W.2d 755 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Ostlund 416 N.W.2d 755 Minn. Ct. App. 1987