Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Miller, 659 N.W.2d 275.

70 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Adam Alan Penhollow Minn. Ct. App. 2026
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
In Re the Marriage of: Minn. Ct. App. 2025
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Demarcius Maurice Payton Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Demarcius Maurice Payton Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“Because the weight and believability of witness testimony is an issue for the district court, we defer to [the district] court’s credibility determinations.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See State v. Miller , (“Because the weight and believability of witness testimony is an issue for the district court, we defer to that court’s credibility determinations.”), rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Randall Thomas Graham Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Randall Thomas Graham Minn. Ct. App. 2023
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
-80 (Minn. App. 2003) (recognizing an individual has the right not to speak with police and concluding that police did not have reasonable, articulable suspicion of drug-re lated criminal activity in part where defendant did not respond to police speaking to him), rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(holding suppressed confession had 6 critical impact even when it was not the only evidence in the record of the defendant’s involvement in a drive -by shooting); (holding suppressed confession had critical impact in prosecution for sexual abuse of a child); (“If suppressed, a confession ‘normally will significantly reduce the likelihood of a successful prosecution.’” (quoting Ronnebaum, d at 724)), rev. denied (Minn. Jul.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
See State v. Miller , rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003) ; see also State v. Roberts , (stating that appellate courts defer to district court’s weighing of expert testimony) .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(“[T]he weight and believability of witness testimony is an issue for the district court .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
rev. denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
Tony Ray Walker, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
We do not disturb the district court’s credibility determinations unless clearly erroneous, which is a “high threshold.” Bobo v. State , -85 (Minn. 2015); State v. Miller , (stating that weight and believability of witnesses is is sue for district court to which we defer) , review denied 6 (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State v. Miller , review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
d 275, 279 (Minn. App. 2003), review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Appellant moved to suppress the firearm evidence under State v. Miller , review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003), which extends Fourth Amendment privacy protections to a passenger in a vehicle subject to an unreasonable stop or search.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
out deciding, that the parties stipulated that if the dog sniff of the vehicle exterior was an illegal search, then the evidence seized in the search of the blue car, in the search of Bolkema’s person, in Bolkema’s second hotel room, as well as Bolkema’s Mirandized statements to officers would be “suppressed as the fruit of the poisonous tree based on the illegal search.” review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“While custody is an essential ele ment of the Miranda analysis, custody, by itself, does not require a Miranda warning; instead, it is only when custodial interrogation occurs that a Miranda warning is required.” -81 (Minn. App. 15 2003) (emphasis in original), review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003) .
State v. Poehler 921 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Poehler 921 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Miller , , 277-78 (Minn. App. 2003) ; see also State v. Tomaino , , 340 (Minn. App. 2001) ("The parties agree that the cracked windshield provided a legal basis for the investigatory stop.").
A17-0564 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
Michael Scott Torfin, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
We apply a de novo standard of review to a district court’s determination of reasonable suspicion of criminal activity, State v. Miller , review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003), and a cl ear-error standard to a district court’s factual findings, considering the “tota lity of the circumstances pertaining to the issue, including possible inno cent explanations for the a lleged suspicious activity,”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Miller , review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
18, 2003); see also State v. Miller , review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Miller , review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See State v. Miller , review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Paula Mirare Overby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Paula Mirare Overby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[T]he weight and believability of witness testimony is an issue for the district court.” review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Marie Schmidt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Marie Schmidt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 275, 279 (Minn. App. 2003), review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Deundrick Demon McIntosh Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Deundrick Demon McIntosh Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Jermaine Sylvester Watkins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jermaine Sylvester Watkins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Scott Andrew Syversrud Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Scott Andrew Syversrud Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Because the weight and believability of witness testimony is an issue for the district court, we defer to that court’s credibility determinations.” review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Deon Sinkfield, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Deon Sinkfield, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See, e.g., id.; d 722, 724 (Minn. 1990)
State of Minnesota v. George Edward Wilson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. George Edward Wilson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Because the weight and believability of witness testimony is an issue for the district court, we defer to that court’s credibility determinations.” review denied (Minn. July 15, 2003).