Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State Ex Rel. Morrow v. LaFleur, 590 N.W.2d 787.

34 citing documents.

Minn. 2021
(suggesting that deference is due to the Department regardin g whether an inmate is amenable to sex offender treatment), overruled on other grounds, (Mi nn.
State of Minnesota, ex rel., Joshua Sather, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Doe 175 ex rel. Doe 175 v. Columbia Heights School District, ISD No. 13 842 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Doe 175 ex rel. Doe 175 v. Columbia Heights School District, ISD No. 13 842 N.W.2d 38 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
791 n. 7 (Minn.1999); Watson, d at 688 ; Wallow Winona, , 390 remanded on reh’g, Harms v. Independent Sch.
Aziz v. Fabian 791 N.W.2d 567 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Aziz v. Fabian 791 N.W.2d 567 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Johnson v. Fabian 735 N.W.2d 295 Minn. 2007
Johnson v. Fabian 735 N.W.2d 295 Minn. 2007
the district court concluded that extension of incarceration did not constitute compulsion and denied Henderson’s petition for a writ of habeas corpus.
State Ex Rel. Henderson v. Fabian 715 N.W.2d 128 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
State Ex Rel. Henderson v. Fabian 715 N.W.2d 128 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
which held there was no Fifth Amendment violation under similar facts.
Johnson v. Fabian 711 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
Johnson v. Fabian 711 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 2006
(holding that inmate’s “choice between treatment and confinement for a larger portion of his sentence” did not rise to the level of compulsion).
In Re the Estate of Bonde 694 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
In Re the Estate of Bonde 694 N.W.2d 74 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
Council of Independent Tobacco Manufacturers of America v. State 685 N.W.2d 467 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
Council of Independent Tobacco Manufacturers of America v. State 685 N.W.2d 467 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Hartmann 681 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Hartmann 681 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
(stating that where a “fundamental right is at stake, the state action is subject to strict scrutiny”).
State v. Hickman 666 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Hickman 666 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
-93 (Minn.1999) (holding inmate was properly terminated from treatment program and disciplined because he refused to admit sexual offense).
State v. Fingal 666 N.W.2d 420 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
Erlandson v. Kiffmeyer 659 N.W.2d 724 Minn. 2003
In re P.T. 657 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In Re PT 657 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In re P.T. 657 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
In Re PT 657 N.W.2d 577 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Schwartz 628 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 2001
State v. Schwartz 628 N.W.2d 134 Minn. 2001
Simpson v. American Family Insurance Co. 603 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Simpson v. American Family Insurance Co. 603 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Kaquatosh 600 N.W.2d 153 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Kaquatosh 600 N.W.2d 153 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
(reviewing de novo defendant’s Fifth Amendment challenge to the Commissioner of Corrections’ imposition of a disciplinary sanction).
State v. Schwartz 598 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Schwartz 598 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
(recognizing that sex offender has no constitutional right to rehabilitative treatment).