Cited by

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

621 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
.S.’s in-court identification, he argues on appeal that he is entitled to a new trial because the trial court “did not strike T.S.’s testimony [concerning the showup] or give the jury a curative instruction.” Because appellant did not ask to have the testimony about the showup stricken or to have a curative jury instruction given, those issues are not properly before us. See Roby v. Stat e, (this court does not generally consider matters not presented to and considered by the district court).
State v. Litzau 893 N.W.2d 405 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Litzau 893 N.W.2d 405 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Thong v. State 892 N.W.2d 842 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Thong v. State 892 N.W.2d 842 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(“[Appellate courts] generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”).
John Patrick Murphy, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“An evidentiary hearing upon a petition for postconviction relief is not required unless the petitioner alleges such facts which, if proved by a fair preponderance of the evidence, would entitle him or her to the requested relief.”
State of Minnesota v. Vernon Dale Howard, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Vernon Dale Howard, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Noor Muhina Salim Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Ryan Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Bashir Abdullahi Farah Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Bashir Abdullahi Farah Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Noor Muhina Salim Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Ryan Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(declining to address a constitutional issue raised for the first time on appeal).
State of Minnesota v. Catherine Nyree McCabe 890 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Catherine Nyree McCabe 890 N.W.2d 173 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(stating that appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure”).
State of Minnesota v. Chad Thomas Karnowski Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Chad Thomas Karnowski Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(stating that an appellate court will not decide issues not raised before the district court unless justice requires it and doing so will not unfairly surprise the other party).
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Vaughn Diamond 890 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Clemente Ramirez-Diaz Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Vaughn Diamond 890 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Clemente Ramirez-Diaz Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(stating that an appellate court will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court).
Denis Alcivar Alvarado-Riera v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Emile Rey 890 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Denis Alcivar Alvarado-Riera v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[Appellate] court[s] generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”
State of Minnesota v. Emile Rey 890 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Aaron Bernard Zuckman Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Aaron Bernard Zuckman Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Timothy Ayman Bakdash v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Damien Kent Hallmon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Timothy Ayman Bakdash v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Damien Kent Hallmon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. T. K. S. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. T. K. S. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(stating that an appellate court will not consider matters not argued to and considered by the district court).
State of Minnesota v. Jose Amador Molina Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Allen Olson 887 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gordon Ranniger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tracee Chung Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tracee Chung Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Allen Olson 887 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jose Amador Molina Minn. Ct. App. 2016
7 (holding that appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure”).
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gordon Ranniger Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Devin Keith Barner Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Devin Keith Barner Minn. Ct. App. 2016
We “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the 4 district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”
State of Minnesota v. Dennis Ervin Carter Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Wallace Alery Christopher Obey Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Wallace Alery Christopher Obey Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dennis Ervin Carter Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Welfare of: S.L.S., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In the Matter of the Welfare of: S.L.S., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2016