Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Axford, 417 N.W.2d 88.

32 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See Hough, d at 397 (stating that the district court is in “the best position to evaluate the offender’s conduct and weigh sentencing options”); see also State v. Axford , -94 (Minn. 1987) (requiring a sufficient trial record before a reviewing court can properly address issues on appeal); (affirming the district court because the appellant failed to provide a trial transcript on appeal, and without a trial transcript it
State of Minnesota v. Cartrell Ismail Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Cartrell Ismail Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2016
11 (“Absent some rule of exclusion or some tendency of the evidence to produce an overbalancing amount of unfair prejudice, corroborating evidence is admissible.”).
State of Minnesota v. Caroline Mildred Jochum Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Caroline Mildred Jochum Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(holding that other-acts evidence was admissible, in part, because it was relevant to giving the jurors context of why a sexual-abuse victim did not come forward right away).
State v. Schulz 691 N.W.2d 474 Minn. 2005
State v. Schulz 691 N.W.2d 474 Minn. 2005
247 n. 2 (Minn.1985) (quoting 22 Charles A. Wright Kenneth W. Graham, Federal Practice and Procedure-Evidence § 5215 at 274-75 (1978)); reh’g denied (Minn. Jan.
State v. Yang 644 N.W.2d 808 Minn. 2002
State v. Yang 644 N.W.2d 808 Minn. 2002
State v. Harris 560 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 1997
State v. Harris 560 N.W.2d 672 Minn. 1997
See People v. Steinberg, 170 A.D.2d 50, 72-75 , 573 N.Y.S.2d 965, 978-80 (NXApp.Div.1991) (ev- *678 idenee of domestic abuse was admissible to give credibility to wife’s testimony, where testimony without explanation of abusive situation would have been unbelievable); -93 (Minn.1987) (admission of similar prior crimes against same victim by defendant’s son was admissible to explain why complaining witness delayed in reporting the sex abuse); Arcoren v. United States, 929 F.2d 1235, 1238-41 (8th
State v. Lewis 547 N.W.2d 360 Minn. 1996
State v. Lewis 547 N.W.2d 360 Minn. 1996
Relevant recent decisions of this court setting forth in detail the settled case law controlling the admission of other-crime or so-called Spreigl 1
State v. Cogshell 538 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 1995
State v. Cogshell 538 N.W.2d 120 Minn. 1995
The case law, which is well-settled, is set forth in detail in a number of decisions, including, State v. Frisinger, 484 M.W.2d 27 (Minn.1992); State v. Filippi
State v. Bolte 530 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1995
State v. Bolte 530 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1995
State v. Berry 484 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 1992
State v. Frisinger 484 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1992
State v. Frisinger 484 N.W.2d 27 Minn. 1992
State v. Berry 484 N.W.2d 14 Minn. 1992
State v. Elvin 481 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Elvin 481 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Naylor 474 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 1991
State v. Naylor 474 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 1991
State v. Bicek 429 N.W.2d 289 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Bicek 429 N.W.2d 289 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
-94 (Minn.1987) (difficulties of judging prejudice from trial error without complete transcript).
State v. Axford 419 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Axford 419 N.W.2d 813 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
The supreme court reversed the granting of a new trial and remanded the case for consideration of the remaining issue, , whether Axford was properly convicted of and sentenced for two counts of criminal sexual conduct.
State v. Witucki 420 N.W.2d 217 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Witucki 420 N.W.2d 217 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
a criminal defendant cannot obtain a new trial on appeal by establishing that error occurred in the conduct of the trial unless he provides this court with a complete transcript or an appropriate stipulation concerning what would be disclosed by a complete transcript” because “[w]ithout such a transcript or stipulation, we cannot verify whether the error resulted in prejudice.” (