Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Cross, 577 N.W.2d 721.

138 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Jiyaad Jamaal Copeland Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Gary Mason Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Gary Mason Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. David Muniz Bustos 861 N.W.2d 655 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. David Muniz Bustos 861 N.W.2d 655 Minn. 2015
Each element of the crime of domestic-abuse murder must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt, including the element of a past pattern of domestic abuse upon the victim or upon another family or household member.
State of Minnesota v. Patrick William Benton 858 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Patrick William Benton 858 N.W.2d 535 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Manuel Hernandes Ayala Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Manuel Hernandes Ayala Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that failure to object to the instructions results in plain-error review).
State of Minnesota v. David Lamar Everett, and David Lamar Everett v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. David Lamar Everett, and David Lamar Everett v. Commissioner of Public Safety Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(“A defendant’s failure to propose specific jury instructions or to object to instructions before they are given to the jury generally constitutes a waiver of the right to appeal.”); -56 (Minn. App. 2014) (stating that an appellate court generally will
State of Minnesota v. Ahavel Abimbola Scherz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Ahavel Abimbola Scherz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Ayala-Leyva 848 N.W.2d 546 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Ayala-Leyva 848 N.W.2d 546 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(providing that defendant’s failure to propose specific jury instructions or to object to instructions before they are given generally constitutes a waiver of the right to challenge instructions on appeal); Minn. R.Crim.
Lussier v. State 821 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2012
Lussier v. State 821 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2012
ense to establish a “past pattern.” See Clark, d at 421-22 (holding that two incidents occurring 13 to 15 years before the murder were not sufficiently proximate in time to constitute underlying domestic abuse offenses, and two more recent incidents — within same year of the murder — were not sufficient on their own to establish a past pattern of domestic abuse); , 727 n. 3 (Minn.1998) (noting that events establishing a “past pattern of domestic abuse” “must be sufficiently proximate in time to
State v. Watkins 820 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Watkins 820 N.W.2d 264 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Smith 819 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Smith 819 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
(“[S]ince defense counsel not only did not object to the instructions but requested instructions similar to those the court gave, we must hold that defendant waived the ...
State v. Prtine 784 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 2010
State v. Prtine 784 N.W.2d 303 Minn. 2010
State v. Eller 780 N.W.2d 375 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Eller 780 N.W.2d 375 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
“Due process requires that every element of the offense charged must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution.”
State v. Johnson 773 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 2009
State v. Johnson 773 N.W.2d 81 Minn. 2009
State v. Hersi 763 N.W.2d 339 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Hersi 763 N.W.2d 339 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Anderson 763 N.W.2d 9 Minn. 2009
State v. Anderson 763 N.W.2d 9 Minn. 2009
State v. Williams 759 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Williams 759 N.W.2d 438 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Word 755 N.W.2d 776 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Word 755 N.W.2d 776 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. O'MEARA 755 N.W.2d 29 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. O'MEARA 755 N.W.2d 29 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
“A defendant’s failure to propose specific jury instructions or to object to instructions before they are given to the jury generally constitutes a waiver of the right to appeal.”
State v. Moua Her 750 N.W.2d 258 Minn. 2008
State v. Moua Her 750 N.W.2d 258 Minn. 2008
Further, “the events must be sufficiently proximate in time to constitute a ‘pattern.’ ” , 727 n. 3 (Minn.1998).
State v. Hughes 749 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 2008
State v. Hughes 749 N.W.2d 307 Minn. 2008
State v. Goelz 743 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 2007
State v. Goelz 743 N.W.2d 249 Minn. 2007
State v. Ouellette 740 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Ouellette 740 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
ANALYSIS “A defendant’s failure to propose specific jury instructions or to object to instructions before they are given to the jury generally constitutes a waiver of the right to appeal.”
State v. Clark 739 N.W.2d 412 Minn. 2007
State v. Clark 739 N.W.2d 412 Minn. 2007
We have noted that “a ‘pattern’ must involve some number of events which bear sufficient relationship to establish a similarity or principle around which they are organized.” , 727 n. 3 (Minn.1998).
State v. Vance 734 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 2007
State v. Vance 734 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 2007
We have also stated that “[d]ue process requires that every element of the offense charged must be proven beyond a reasonable doubt by the prosecution.”
State v. Hager 727 N.W.2d 668 Minn. Ct. App. 2007