Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Botsford, 630 N.W.2d 11.

24 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Eloisa Rubi Plancarte, Appellant Minn. 2025
Overruled State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Eloisa Rubi Plancarte, Appellant Minn. 2025
8 held that the word “lewdly” is limited to obscene conduct in the context of indecent exposure, we overrule it.
State of Minnesota v. Eloisa Rubi Plancarte Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Eloisa Rubi Plancarte Minn. Ct. App. 2024
rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
In re the Matter of: Kimberly Rose Wangsness and on Behalf of Minor Children, petitioner, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
behavior” to be “synonymous with obscene behavior,” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
In re the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: A. B. and M. J. B., Parents. Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In State v. Botsford , review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota v. Donald Joseph Hall, Jr. 887 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Donald Joseph Hall, Jr. 887 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Nickolas Mousel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Nickolas Mousel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Lewd” means “obscene” or “openly lustful or indecent.” review denied (Minn. Sept.
Danika Paige Anastasi v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Danika Paige Anastasi v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“To challenge a district court ruling, a respondent has to file a notice of review, ‘[e]ven if the judgment below is ultimately in its favor.’”1 ( review denied (Minn. Aug.
City of Duluth v. 120 East Superior Street, Duluth, Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
City of Duluth v. 120 East Superior Street, Duluth, Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“The constitutionality of an ordinance is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo.” 8 review denied (Minn. Sept.
State v. Stockwell 770 N.W.2d 533 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Stockwell 770 N.W.2d 533 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
review denied (Minn. Sept.
Dunham v. Roer 708 N.W.2d 552 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Dunham v. Roer 708 N.W.2d 552 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. Levie 695 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Levie 695 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
City of Elko v. Abed 677 N.W.2d 455 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
City of Elko v. Abed 677 N.W.2d 455 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
“The constitutionality of an ordinance is a question of law, which this court reviews de novo.” review denied (Minn. Sept.
Johnson v. State 654 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Johnson v. State 654 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2002