Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Greenleaf, 591 N.W.2d 488.
- State v. King 622 N.W.2d 800 Minn. 2001
- State v. King 622 N.W.2d 800 Minn. 2001
- Santiago v. State 617 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
-
Santiago v. State
617 N.W.2d 632
Minn. Ct. App. 2000
420 , 145 L.Ed.2d 328 (1999); State v. Greenleaf cert.
- State v. Martin 614 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 2000
-
State v. Martin
614 N.W.2d 214
Minn. 2000
-41 (Minn.1999); -96 (Minn.1999); -77 (Minn.1999).
- State v. Denison 607 N.W.2d 796 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
- State v. Denison 607 N.W.2d 796 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
- State v. Wolf 605 N.W.2d 381 Minn. 2000
-
State v. Wolf
605 N.W.2d 381
Minn. 2000
“The admissibility of expert testimony has generally rested in the discretion of the [district] court.” State v. Greenleaf
- State v. DeVerney 592 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 1999
- State v. DeVerney 592 N.W.2d 837 Minn. 1999
- State v. Aubid 591 N.W.2d 472 Minn. 1999
- State v. Martin 591 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1999
- State v. Martin 591 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1999
- State v. Aubid 591 N.W.2d 472 Minn. 1999