Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Horning, 535 N.W.2d 296.

27 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See, (noting that a basic requisite for the admissibility of any evidence is that it be competent and relevant).
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
State v. Hallmark 927 N.W.2d 281 Minn. 2019
" State v. Ture , , 631 (Minn. 2001) (quoting State v. Horning , , 298 (Minn. 1995) ).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Mannie Lamar Banks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Mannie Lamar Banks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(excluding evidence as irrelevant where the evidence did not bear upon any of the statutorily defined elements of the crime charged).
State v. Tanksley 809 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 2012
State v. Tanksley 809 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 2012
Jacobson v. $55,900 in U.S. Currency, Minn. R. Evid.
State v. Smoot 737 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Smoot 737 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
-300 (Minn.1995); see Minn. Dep’t of Pub.
Jacobson v. $55,900 in U.S. Currency 728 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2007
Jacobson v. $55,900 in U.S. Currency 728 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2007
State v. Levie 695 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Levie 695 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
“The party claiming error has the burden of showing both the error and the prejudice.”
State v. Carter 682 N.W.2d 648 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Carter 682 N.W.2d 648 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
“Evidentiary rulings involving the relevancy of evidence are generally left to the sound discretion of the trial court.”
State v. Ture 632 N.W.2d 621 Minn. 2001
State v. Ture 632 N.W.2d 621 Minn. 2001
Rulings on the “relevancy of evidence are generally left to the sound discretion of the trial court.”
State v. Henderson 620 N.W.2d 688 Minn. 2001
State v. Henderson 620 N.W.2d 688 Minn. 2001
State v. Woelfel 621 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Woelfel 621 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Stone 572 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1997
State v. Stone 572 N.W.2d 725 Minn. 1997
See, (stan-dard for careless driving is “likely to endanger any property or person”); ( Minn. Stat. § 169.121 intended to create as effective and encompassing a remedy as possible to eradicate drunk driving from our streets and highways).
State v. Walen 563 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1997
State v. Walen 563 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1997
Evidence is relevant when it “logically or reasonably tends to prove or disprove a material fact in issue, or tends to make such a fact more or less probable, or affords a basis for or supports a reasonable inference or presumption regarding the existence of a material fact.”