Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Kobow, 466 N.W.2d 747.

51 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Jorge Luis Sandoval Minn. Ct. App. 2026
See Minn. Stat. § 609.347 (2022); (concluding that the term “sexual conduct” as used in Minn. Stat. § 609.347 includes “allegations of sexual abuse”), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Raymond Boy Strong Minn. Ct. App. 2026
See, d 121, 125 (Minn. 1990) (“[W]hen a [district] court rules that evidence of a sexual assault victim’s prior sexual conduct is inadmissible, no reference to such conduct shall be made 7 in the presence of the jury.” (quotation omitted)); (concluding victim’s prior sexual-abuse allegations are within rape-shield law and inadmissible), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Bruce Edward Frye Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Lorenzo Devon Doby Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Jonathan Deloye Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Even so, a victim’s prior sexual conduct may be admissible as “constitutionally required by the defendant’s right to due process, his right to confront his accuser, or his right to offer evidence in his own defense.” ( 7 The state responds, however, to Deloye’s related claim that the district court’s exclusion of this evidence was a Brady violation.
State of Minnesota v. Edin Arnold Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Yet, in certain cases, the admission of previous sexual conduct evidence otherwise excluded by the rape-shield law may be “constitutionally required by the defendant’s right to due process, his right to confront his accuser, or his right to offer evidence in his own defense.” rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Azzel Mickey Lee Foster Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State v. Kowbow , rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Tirson Lamberty Castro Minn. Ct. App. 2024
And a defendant cannot be “convicted of two counts of criminal sexual conduct (different sections of the statute or different subsections) on the basis of the same act or unitary course of c onduct.” State v. Folley , d 372, 373 (Minn. 1989) (vacating one of two convictions for criminal sexual conduct when both were based on the same evidence of the same acts); ( stating that second-degree criminal sexual conduct is a lesser included offense of first -degree criminal sexual conduct) ; see also M
State of Minnesota v. William Kenneth Pike Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(stating that second-degree criminal sexual conduct is a lesser included offense of first-degree criminal sexual conduct), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Larry Ray House Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Larry Ray House Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Dwayne Thurston Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Dwayne Thurston Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(agreeing “with the trial court that the term ‘sexual conduct’ as used in Minn. Stat. § 609.347 includes ‘allegations of sexual abuse’”), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Paul Bradley Lanphear Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Paul Bradley Lanphear Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Donald Knott Minn. Ct. App. 2023
1(4); (holding that a lower degree of criminal sexual conduct is a lesser-included offense where the “difference is simply one of sexual contact versus sexual penetration”), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Samuel Lee Griffith Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Marcelo Mendez Zepeta Minn. Ct. App. 2022
11-12 (2014) (defining “sexual contact” and “sexual penetration”); d 747, 752 (Minn. App. 1991) (noting that evidence of sexual penetration raises an inference of sexual contact), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Lidio Roque Rodriguez Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Arturo Macarro Gutierrez Minn. Ct. App. 2021
degree criminal sexual conduct [is a] lesser-included offense[] of first- degree criminal sexual conduct.” State v. Kobow , review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Linden Gene McKinney Minn. Ct. App. 2021
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Andre Joseph Shafer Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State v. Kobow , review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Kenneth Keith Clark Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State v. Kobow , review denied (Minn. Apr.
Grant Lloyd Greenwood v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2021
17, 2020); (holding that the difference between the statutes for first-degree and second-degree criminal sexual conduct is simply one of sexual contact versus sexual penetration); compare Minn. Stat. § 609.342, subd.
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Loren Allen Maine Minn. Ct. App. 2020
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Deshawn Henderson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Carr Leon Hagerman Minn. Ct. App. 2020
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Nicholas James Bandur Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Kobow , review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Robert Howard Nordquist Minn. Ct. App. 2018
d 747, 750 (Minn. App. 1991), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. David Robert Davidson Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In the Matter of the Welfare of: D. A. D., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Eric James Rutherford Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Eric James Rutherford Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(determining second- and fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct were lesser-included offenses of first-degree criminal sexual conduct because the difference was “simply one of sexual contact versus sexual penetration.”), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Tyrese Thomas Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tyrese Thomas Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Emem Ufot Udoh Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Emem Ufot Udoh Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Gerald Michalec Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Gerald Michalec Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State 8 v. Kobow, review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Osma Mardoqueo Escho Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Osma Mardoqueo Escho Sanchez Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Evidence of a victim’s prior sexual conduct “may be admitted where it is constitutionally required by the defendant’s right to due process, his right to confront his accuser, or his right to offer evidence in his own defense.” d 747, 750 (Minn. App. 1991) ().
State of Minnesota v. Donavon Duane Bellanger Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Donavon Duane Bellanger Minn. Ct. App. 2014
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Javier Zapien-Arreola Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Javier Zapien-Arreola Minn. Ct. App. 2014
3, including “‘allegations of sexual abuse,’” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State v. Carroll 639 N.W.2d 623 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Carroll 639 N.W.2d 623 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
§ 609.347 has been defined to include "allegations of sexual abuse.” (Minn.App.
State v. Ostrem 520 N.W.2d 426 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Ostrem 520 N.W.2d 426 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Griffith 480 N.W.2d 347 Minn. Ct. App. 1992