Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Roby v. State, 547 N.W.2d 354.

621 citing documents.

Stutelberg v. State 741 N.W.2d 867 Minn. 2007
I. On appeal from a summary denial of a petition for postconviction relief, we “determine[ ] only whether sufficient evidence exists to support the lower court’s findings.”
State v. Shriner 739 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Shriner 739 N.W.2d 432 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
In Re the Welfare of S.J.T. 736 N.W.2d 341 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
In Re the Welfare of S.J.T. 736 N.W.2d 341 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Fields v. State 733 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 2007
Fields v. State 733 N.W.2d 465 Minn. 2007
(applying the Strickland test to claims of ineffective assistance of trial counsel); -57 (Minn.1996) (applying the Strickland test to claims of ineffective assistance of appellate counsel).
State v. J.Y.M. 711 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. JYM 711 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. J.Y.M. 711 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State v. JYM 711 N.W.2d 139 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Perry v. State 705 N.W.2d 572 Minn. 2005
Perry v. State 705 N.W.2d 572 Minn. 2005
see Brookfield Trade Ctr., , 873 n. 6 (Minn.2000) (noting that this court may address issues not otherwise ripe for appeal in the interest of justice and judicial economy).
State v. Boehl 697 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Boehl 697 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Thompson 694 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Thompson 694 N.W.2d 117 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
(stating that “[tjhis court generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure”).
State v. Fitzpatrick 690 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Fitzpatrick 690 N.W.2d 387 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(stating that “[tjhis court generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure”).
State v. McDonnell 686 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. McDonnell 686 N.W.2d 841 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(stating appellate courts generally will not decide issues that were not raised before the district court).
State v. Kier 678 N.W.2d 672 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Kier 678 N.W.2d 672 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(normally defendant’s “failure to raise the issue before the district court at trial precludes its litigation on appeal”).
Washington v. State 675 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 2004
Washington v. State 675 N.W.2d 628 Minn. 2004
State v. Wilkens 671 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Wilkens 671 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Bergerson 671 N.W.2d 197 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Bergerson 671 N.W.2d 197 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
(This court will generally not consider matters not argued and considered in the district court.).
State v. Kramer 668 N.W.2d 32 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Kramer 668 N.W.2d 32 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Cunningham 663 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Cunningham 663 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Grunig 660 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 2003
State v. Grunig 660 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 2003
State v. Jackson 655 N.W.2d 828 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Jackson 655 N.W.2d 828 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Ives v. State 655 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 2003
Ives v. State 655 N.W.2d 633 Minn. 2003
State v. Chomnarith 654 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2003
State v. Chomnarith 654 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2003
State v. Jones 647 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Jones 647 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
(courts generally do not review issues not raised before the district court).
In Re the Welfare of R.J.E. 630 N.W.2d 457 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re the Welfare of R.J.E. 630 N.W.2d 457 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Botsford 630 N.W.2d 11 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Botsford 630 N.W.2d 11 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Because appellant did not present this argument to the district court
In Re Preston 629 N.W.2d 104 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
In Re Preston 629 N.W.2d 104 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Fedor 628 N.W.2d 164 Minn. Ct. App. 2001