Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Russell v. State, 562 N.W.2d 670.

58 citing documents.

John Stephen Woodward, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A court may consider an otherwise Knaffla-barred claim “in limited situations when fairness so requires and when the petitioner did not deliberately and inexcusably fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.” Ademodi v. State , d 716, 718 (Minn. 2000) ().
Joseph Milton Barnes, petitioner Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
D E C I S I O N “This court reviews a postconviction proceeding to determine only whether sufficient evidence exists to support the postconviction court’s findings.”
Raymond Darrel Pfarr v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Raymond Darrel Pfarr v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Second, even if the claim’s legal basis was 3 sufficiently available, substantive review may be allowed “when fairness so requires and when the petitioner did not deliberately and inexcusably fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.” (quotation omitted).
Scherf v. State 788 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 2010
Scherf v. State 788 N.W.2d 504 Minn. 2010
Dobbins v. State 788 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 2010
Dobbins v. State 788 N.W.2d 719 Minn. 2010
Evans v. State 788 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2010
Evans v. State 788 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 2010
Finnegan v. State 764 N.W.2d 856 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Finnegan v. State 764 N.W.2d 856 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
We examine whether the district court’s findings are supported by sufficient evidence, and review legal issues de novo.
El-Shabazz v. State 754 N.W.2d 370 Minn. 2008
El-Shabazz v. State 754 N.W.2d 370 Minn. 2008
Brocks v. State 753 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 2008
Brocks v. State 753 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 2008
Brown v. State 746 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 2008
Brown v. State 746 N.W.2d 640 Minn. 2008
Hathaway v. State 741 N.W.2d 875 Minn. 2007
Hathaway v. State 741 N.W.2d 875 Minn. 2007
Buggs v. State 734 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2007
Buggs v. State 734 N.W.2d 272 Minn. 2007
Fields v. State 733 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 2007
Fields v. State 733 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 2007
Townsend v. State 723 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2006
Townsend v. State 723 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 2006
Second, even if the claim’s legal basis was sufficiently available, substantive review may be allowed “when fairness so requires and when the petitioner did not ‘deliberately and inexcusably’ fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.” (quoting Roby, d at 484 ).
Pierson v. State 715 N.W.2d 923 Minn. 2006
Pierson v. State 715 N.W.2d 923 Minn. 2006
The second exception may be applied if fairness requires and “‘the petitioner did not deliberately and inexcusably fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.’ ” ().
Whitten v. State 690 N.W.2d 561 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Whitten v. State 690 N.W.2d 561 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Sessions v. State 666 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 2003
Sessions v. State 666 N.W.2d 718 Minn. 2003
The third exception may be applied if fairness requires and the petitioner did not “ ‘deliberately and inexcusably’ fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.” ().
Ferguson v. State 645 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 2002
Ferguson v. State 645 N.W.2d 437 Minn. 2002
Boitnott v. State 640 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 2002
Boitnott v. State 640 N.W.2d 626 Minn. 2002
However, an exception to the Knajf-la rule provides that “[e]ven if the legal basis of the claim was reasonably available, this court may allow substantive review in limited situations when fairness so requires and when the petitioner did not ‘deliberately and inexcusably’ fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.” ().
Pierson v. State 637 N.W.2d 571 Minn. 2002
Robledo-Kinney v. State 637 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2002
Pierson v. State 637 N.W.2d 571 Minn. 2002
Robledo-Kinney v. State 637 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2002
Dukes v. State 621 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2001
Dukes v. State 621 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2001
Ademodi v. State 616 N.W.2d 716 Minn. 2000
Ademodi v. State 616 N.W.2d 716 Minn. 2000
In addition, the court may consider a claim not raised on direct appeal “in limited situations when fairness so requires and when the petitioner did not deliberately and inexcusably fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.” (quotation omitted).
Jihad v. State 594 N.W.2d 522 Minn. 1999
Jihad v. State 594 N.W.2d 522 Minn. 1999
Gassler v. State 590 N.W.2d 769 Minn. 1999
Gassler v. State 590 N.W.2d 769 Minn. 1999
Aso, even where the legal basis was reasonably available, “this court may allow substantive review of [a] claim in limited situations when fairness so requires and when the petitioner did not ‘deliberately and inexcusably’ fail to raise the issue on direct appeal.” (quoting Roby, d at 484 ).
Steinbuch v. State 589 N.W.2d 464 Minn. 1999
Steinbuch v. State 589 N.W.2d 464 Minn. 1999

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by