Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Basting, 572 N.W.2d 281.

139 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Devens 852 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Devens 852 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 2014
State v. Welle 847 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Welle 847 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that the defendant has the initial burden to produce evidence to support a self-defense claim, and if that burden has been met, the burden shifts to the state to disprove the elements of self-defense beyond a reasonable doubt).
State v. Vang 847 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 2014
State v. Vang 847 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 2014
State v. Weyaus 836 N.W.2d 579 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Weyaus 836 N.W.2d 579 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
is a dangerous weapon, the court must examine not only the nature of the object itself, but also the manner in which it was used.”
State v. Munt 831 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2013
State v. Radke 821 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2012
State v. Radke 821 N.W.2d 316 Minn. 2012
State v. Yaritz 791 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Yaritz 791 N.W.2d 138 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Hall 764 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 2009
State v. Hall 764 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 2009
The court gave an accurate self-defense instruction requiring four conditions, the fourth of which was “no reasonable possibility of retreat to avoid the danger.” 7 d at 619, 629 (Minn.2006) (stating the four conditions of self-defense) ().
State v. Wembley 728 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2007
State v. Wembley 728 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 2007
State v. Johnson 719 N.W.2d 619 Minn. 2006
State v. Johnson 719 N.W.2d 619 Minn. 2006
The defendant “has the burden of going forward with evidence to support a claim of self-defense.”
State v. Penkaty 708 N.W.2d 185 Minn. 2006
State v. Penkaty 708 N.W.2d 185 Minn. 2006
In Re the Expulsion of I.A.L. 674 N.W.2d 741 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
In Re the Expulsion of I.A.L. 674 N.W.2d 741 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Soukup 656 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Soukup 656 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Conger 652 N.W.2d 704 Minn. 2002
State v. Conger 652 N.W.2d 704 Minn. 2002
(finding this court can hear issues raised for the first time before it on a discretionary basis).
State v. Vazquez 644 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Vazquez 644 N.W.2d 97 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
(-86 (Minn.1997)); see also Minn.Stat.
In Re the Welfare of W.A.H. 642 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
In Re the Welfare of W.A.H. 642 N.W.2d 41 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Ortiz 626 N.W.2d 445 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Ortiz 626 N.W.2d 445 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(evidence insufficient to support that fists were used as a dangerous weapon); (hands and feet were, dangerous weapons in assault of pregnant woman).
In Re the Welfare of P.W.F. 625 N.W.2d 152 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re the Welfare of P.W.F. 625 N.W.2d 152 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(applying de novo standard in determining whether fist was dangerous weapon).
State v. Nystrom 596 N.W.2d 256 Minn. 1999
State v. Nystrom 596 N.W.2d 256 Minn. 1999
The elements of self-defense are “(1) the absence of aggression or provocation on the part of the defendant; (2) the defendant’s actual and honest belief that he or she was in imminent danger of death or great bodily harm; (3) the existence of reasonable grounds for that belief; and (4) the absence of a reasonable possibility of retreat to avoid the danger.” -86 (Minn.1997); see also Minn.Stat.
State v. Gebremariam 590 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1999
State v. Gebremariam 590 N.W.2d 781 Minn. 1999