Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Butcher, 563 N.W.2d 776.

147 citing documents.

Juan Pachuco Silva v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Jhonathan Jontae Robinson Minn. Ct. App. 2025
n.6 (Minn. 2017) (declining to reach a constitutional issue raised for the first time on appeal); (stating that inadequately briefed issues are not properly before an appellate court), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Morries Lester Hall Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Jarrod James Pohl Minn. Ct. App. 2025
d 776, 780 (Minn. App. 1997), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Deshawn Coleman Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(deeming an issue forfeited because the appellant failed to make and develop an argument in their brief), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Alfredo Torrez Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(an inadequately briefed issue is not properly before this court).
A24-1146 State of Minnesota v. Cory Donavan Dodge Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(holding that issues not briefed are waived).
State of Minnesota v. John Warren Harris Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Relying on, rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Angela Rena Cloar Minn. Ct. App. 2024
But alleged errors not raised in an appellate brief are forfeited, rev. denied (Minn Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Herman Bobo Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(declining to address a forfeited issue); (declining to address an issue for which no argument was developed in the brief), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Patrick Dean Nielsen Minn. Ct. App. 2024
In the Matter of the Welfare of: T. R. J., Jr., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-81 (Minn. App. 1997) (noting that inadequately briefed issues are waived), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Eric Anthony Klaysmat Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Klaysmat’s rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Dennis Anthony Bradley Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“Minnesota appellate courts decline to reach an issue in the absence of adequate briefing.” rev. denied (Minn. June 20, 2017); (argument waived where “appellant fails to make and develop any argument, other than a general statement”), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
Nathan Wesley McDonald v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Nathan Wesley McDonald v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Keith Alan Powelson Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Keith Alan Powelson Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 776, 780 (Minn. App. 1997), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Kyle Duwayne Harms Minn. Ct. App. 2023
4 (providing that no further briefs may be filed without leave of appellate court); (stating party may not raise a new argument at oral argument) (citing State v. Bucher , (Minn. App. 2 Under Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Zaki Malik Saleem Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See, (stating that appellate courts will not consider arguments that are unsupported by the record and devoid of legal authority); (deeming an issue waived because appellant failed to make and develop an argument in their brief).
Kristopher Lee Roybal v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2023
-81 (Minn. App. 1997) (concluding appellant waived an issue when their brief did not make or develop any argument), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
In the Matter of the Welfare of: T. D. M., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(noting issues not adequately briefed are not properly before an appellate court), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Gail Lynn Schauer Minn. Ct. App. 2023
d 776, 780 (Minn. App. 1997), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Mark Daniel Murrell, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(noting that issues not briefed on appeal are waived), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
In the Matter of the Welfare of: K. A. H., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See State v. Butcher , d 776, 780 (Minn. App. 1997) (noting that is sues not briefed are not properly before an appellate court), rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota, by Jan Malcolm, Commissioner of Health in her official capacity v. The Iron Waffle Coffee … Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State v. Butcher , rev. denied (Minn. Aug.
Lance Arnold Kingbird v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2021
John Louis Corrigan v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State v. Rey , n.3 (Minn. App. 2017) (stating that “issues not briefed are forfeited”) ( review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Andrew Hondl Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(stating that appellate court will not decide issues not raised before district court); (stating that inadequately briefed issues are not properly before this court) , review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. James Antrquier Thomas Minn. Ct. App. 2021
review denied (Minn. August.
State of Minnesota v. Allison Ann Mastin Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See State v. Butcher , review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Pedro Ray Tejeda Minn. Ct. App. 2021
review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Lavelle Darnell Owens Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See State v. Butcher , review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Allen Crotty Minn. Ct. App. 2020
He provides no legal support or argument on this issue, however, and therefore it also is waiv ed. See State v. Butcher , , review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Edgar Noe Lopez-Monter Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(criminal), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Brock William Fredin Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See State v. Merrill , (requiring party challenging constitutionality of statute to prove constitu tional defect beyond a reasonable doubt); (noting that inadequately briefed issues are not properly before an appellate court), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. James Obonyo Onuko Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See State v. Butcher , (noting that inadequately 9 briefed issues are not properly before an appellate court), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Brian Anthony Varnado Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See State v. Butcher , review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Mario Antonio Burciaga Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Butcher , review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. James Warren Northrup Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 776, 781-83 (Minn. App. 1997) (noting that district court must make detailed factual findings on the treaties when interpreting Indian treaties), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Nicholas James Bandur Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(concluding that appellant’s arguments were not properly before the court because appellant failed “to make and develop any argument, other than a general statement”) , review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Dwight Lee Docken Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Darin Bean Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See Marchbanks, d at 732 (concluding that the appellant’ s conduct was divisible because he “could unlawfully possess a firearm without possessing any crack cocaine, and conversely, he could possess crack cocaine without possessing a firearm”); (holding offense of possessing uncased firearm was separate from illegal taking of deer and driving after cancellation because, although committed in same time frame, the offenses did not share “an indivisible state of mind”), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Adrian Thomas Howell Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(stating that review of a rul e 26.01, subdivision 4, proceeding is limited to the dispositive pretrial ruling); (stating that appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court); State v. B utcher, (stating that issues not adequately briefed are waived), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota (A18-1579) (A18-1569) v. William Cornell Walker (A18-1569) (A18-1579) Minn. Ct. App. 2019
See State v. Yang , (holding that issues raised for the first time in an appellant’s reply brief were deemed waived); (noting that inadequately briefed issues are not properly before an appellate court), review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Charles Earl Strother Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 776, 780 (Minn. App. 1997) (“Where a defendant asserts error, but fails to address the error in his appellate brief, the issue is deemed waived.”), review denied (Minn. Aug.
Kevin Scott Karsjens v. Tony Lourey, Commissioner of the Department of Human Services, Shelby Richardson, et al Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Aug.
David Wayne Benolt v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
d 354, 357 (Minn. 1996); review denied (Minn. Aug.
State of Minnesota v. Carlos Kendall Duncan Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Aug.
In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of: Jose Luis Gutierrez Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(Minn. 2002) (stating that because appellant’s pro se supplemental brief contained “no argument or citation to legal authority in support of the alleg ations” those arguments are waived); (noting that appellant failed to provide any authority or argument to support several of his cla ims and therefore those claims were waived); (“Where a defendant asserts error, but fa ils to address the error in hi s appellate brief, the issue is deemed waived.”), review denied (Minn. Aug.