Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Merrill, 450 N.W.2d 318.

100 citing documents.

State v. Hall 722 N.W.2d 472 Minn. 2006
229 (Minn.1995) (applying transferred intent doctrine when, in the course of shooting a police officer, defendant wounded a bystander); (holding intent to kill mother is transferable to her fetus); Sutherlin, d at 239-40 (holding defendant guilty of first-degree premeditated murder through transferred intent when defendant premeditated and intended the murder of one man but accidentally shot and killed a bystander).
County of Stearns v. Barnell 693 N.W.2d 455 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
County of Stearns v. Barnell 693 N.W.2d 455 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Ledden v. State 686 N.W.2d 873 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Ledden v. State 686 N.W.2d 873 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Serena 673 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Serena 673 N.W.2d 182 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Tennin 674 N.W.2d 403 Minn. 2004
State v. Tennin 674 N.W.2d 403 Minn. 2004
State v. Frazier 649 N.W.2d 828 Minn. 2002
State v. Frazier 649 N.W.2d 828 Minn. 2002
In Re the Welfare of C.P.K. 615 N.W.2d 832 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
In Re the Welfare of C.P.K. 615 N.W.2d 832 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura 610 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 2000
Associated Builders & Contractors v. Ventura 610 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 2000
State v. Larson 605 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 2000
State v. Larson 605 N.W.2d 706 Minn. 2000
Boutin v. LaFleur 591 N.W.2d 711 Minn. 1999
Boutin v. LaFleur 591 N.W.2d 711 Minn. 1999
Therefore, a party challenging a statute has the “very heavy burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute is unconstitutional.”
State v. Chambers 589 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1999
State v. Chambers 589 N.W.2d 466 Minn. 1999
2969 , 106 L.Ed.2d 306 (1989)); cert.
State v. Hough 571 N.W.2d 578 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. MacHholz 574 N.W.2d 415 Minn. 1998
State v. Hough 571 N.W.2d 578 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
See State *582 v. Merrill, (transferred intent applied to support conviction for first- and 'second-degree murder committed against an unborn child where unintended unborn child victim suffered substantially similar harm as mother, the intended victim); -30 (Minn.App.1988) (transferred in
State v. MacHholz 574 N.W.2d 415 Minn. 1998
A party challenging a statute has the “burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute is unconstitutional.” (citations omitted).
State v. Behl 564 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 1997
State v. Behl 564 N.W.2d 560 Minn. 1997
“[T]o challenge successfully the constitutional validity of a statute, the challenger bears the very heavy burden of demonstrating beyond a reasonable doubt that the statute is unconstitutional.” cert.
Women of the State v. Gomez 542 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 1995
Women of the State v. Gomez 542 N.W.2d 17 Minn. 1995
However, a woman’s right of privacy encompasses her decision whether to choose health care services necessary to terminate or to continue a pregnancy without interference from the state, “at least until such time as the state’s important interest in protecting the potentiality of human life predominates over the right to privacy, which is usually at viability.” cert.
In Re the Welfare of L.J.S. 539 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
In Re the Welfare of L.J.S. 539 N.W.2d 408 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
(defendant claiming statute is unconstitutional bears heavy burden of showing uneonstitu-tionality beyond a reasonable doubt), cert.
State v. Robinson 539 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 1995
State v. Robinson 539 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 1995
State v. Ford 539 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 1995
State v. Ford 539 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 1995
If the harms are different, intent is not transferable.”
State v. Chao Yang 533 N.W.2d 81 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Wetsch 511 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Wetsch 511 N.W.2d 490 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Christie 506 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 1993
State v. Christie 506 N.W.2d 293 Minn. 1993
State v. Christie 494 N.W.2d 492 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Christie 494 N.W.2d 492 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Clausen 493 N.W.2d 113 Minn. 1992
State v. Clausen 493 N.W.2d 113 Minn. 1992
A party challenging the constitutionality of a statute “bears the very heavy burden of demonstrating * * * that the statute is unconstitutional.”
Minnesota Federation of Teachers v. Mammenga 485 N.W.2d 305 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
Minnesota Federation of Teachers v. Mammenga 485 N.W.2d 305 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Bauer 471 N.W.2d 363 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Bauer 471 N.W.2d 363 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
ANALYSIS I. Bauer concedes a cert.
State v. Ohrtman 466 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Ohrtman 466 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1991