Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Scruggs v. State, 484 N.W.2d 21.
- Rainer v. State 566 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 1997
- Rainer v. State 566 N.W.2d 692 Minn. 1997
- State v. Walen 563 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1997
- State v. Walen 563 N.W.2d 742 Minn. 1997
- State v. Butcher 563 N.W.2d 776 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
-
State v. Butcher
563 N.W.2d 776
Minn. Ct. App. 1997
25 n. 1 (Minn.1992) (holding that where defendant’s appellate brief does not address issues raised in petition for post-conviction relief, those issues are deemed waived).
- King v. State 562 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 1997
- King v. State 562 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 1997
- Russell v. State 562 N.W.2d 670 Minn. 1997
- Russell v. State 562 N.W.2d 670 Minn. 1997
- State v. Aviles-Alvarez 561 N.W.2d 523 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
- State v. Aviles-Alvarez 561 N.W.2d 523 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
- Black v. State 560 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1997
- Black v. State 560 N.W.2d 83 Minn. 1997
- Berg v. State 557 N.W.2d 593 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
-
Berg v. State
557 N.W.2d 593
Minn. Ct. App. 1996
(stating that a direct appeal is not the most appropriate way to raise an ineffective assistance claim); , 332 n. 5 (Minn.1984) (same); (reiterating that an ineffective assistance of counsel claim is properly raised in
- Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
- Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
- McMaster v. State 551 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 1996
-
McMaster v. State
551 N.W.2d 218
Minn. 1996
Our inquiry is limited to “deter-min[ing] whether there is sufficient evidence to sustain the posteonviction court’s findings.”
- State v. Balma 549 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
- State v. Balma 549 N.W.2d 102 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
- Roby v. State 547 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1996
- Roby v. State 547 N.W.2d 354 Minn. 1996
- State v. Wallace 545 N.W.2d 674 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
- State v. Wallace 545 N.W.2d 674 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
- State v. Cole 542 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1996
- State v. Cole 542 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1996
- Hodgson v. State 540 N.W.2d 515 Minn. 1995
-
Hodgson v. State
540 N.W.2d 515
Minn. 1995
An appellate court “reviews a post-conviction proceeding only to determine whether there is sufficient evidence to sustain the postconviction court’s findings, and a postconvietion court’s decision will not be disturbed absent an abuse of discretion.”
- Miller v. State 531 N.W.2d 491 Minn. 1995
- Miller v. State 531 N.W.2d 491 Minn. 1995
- Roby v. State 531 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 1995
- Roby v. State 531 N.W.2d 482 Minn. 1995
- Crisler v. State 520 N.W.2d 22 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
-
Crisler v. State
520 N.W.2d 22
Minn. Ct. App. 1994
(reasonableness of counsel’s actions need not be evaluated if defendant cannot show prejudice).