Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Vick, 632 N.W.2d 676.
-
State v. Caulfield
722 N.W.2d 304
Minn. 2006
( for the proposition that review of evidentiary errors implicating constitutional rights can be forfeited); Minn. R.Crim.
- Schleicher v. State 718 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 2006
- Schleicher v. State 718 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 2006
- State v. Osborne 715 N.W.2d 436 Minn. 2006
-
State v. Osborne
715 N.W.2d 436
Minn. 2006
See, (prosecutorial misconduct); (erroneous jury instructions); (evidentiary errors); (responding to jury questions).
- State v. Vance 714 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 2006
- State v. Vance 714 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 2006
- State v. Manthey 711 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 2006
-
State v. Manthey
711 N.W.2d 498
Minn. 2006
(citing Griller, d at 740 ).
- White v. State 711 N.W.2d 106 Minn. 2006
- White v. State 711 N.W.2d 106 Minn. 2006
- State v. Maurstad 706 N.W.2d 545 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
-
State v. Maurstad
706 N.W.2d 545
Minn. Ct. App. 2005
See, -36 (Minn.2005) (applying plain-error analysis when appellant alleged prosecutorial misconduct for the first time on appeal); -85 (Minn.2001) (explaining that failure to object to the admission of evidence at trial waived that challenge on appeal unless the admission was plain error).
- State v. Johnson 699 N.W.2d 335 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
- State v. Johnson 699 N.W.2d 335 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
- State v. Washington 693 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2005
- State v. Washington 693 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2005
- State v. Washington 693 N.W.2d 195 Minn. 2005
-
State v. Washington
693 N.W.2d 195
Minn. 2005
State v. Vick , , 684-85 (Minn. 2001).
- State v. Bobadilla 690 N.W.2d 345 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
-
State v. Bobadilla
690 N.W.2d 345
Minn. Ct. App. 2004
While issues not raised at trial are generally waived on appeal, -85 (Minn.2001), we reserve the right to consider those issues, particularly when they are raised in criminal cases.
- Torres v. State 688 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2004
- Torres v. State 688 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2004
- State v. Al-Naseer 678 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
- State v. Al-Naseer 678 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
- State v. McBride 666 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2003
- State v. McBride 666 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2003
- State v. Jarvis 665 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 2003
- State v. Jarvis 665 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 2003
- Dukes v. State 660 N.W.2d 804 Minn. 2003
-
Dukes v. State
660 N.W.2d 804
Minn. 2003
Because Vick’s attorney’s comments, viewed in context, do not constitute a confession, a new trial is not warranted on this basis.” (emphasis added).
- State v. Quick 659 N.W.2d 701 Minn. 2003
- State v. Quick 659 N.W.2d 701 Minn. 2003
- State v. Roberts 651 N.W.2d 198 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
-
State v. Roberts
651 N.W.2d 198
Minn. Ct. App. 2002
-85 (Minn.2001) (applying waiver standard to evidentiary error).
- State v. Lee 645 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 2002
- State v. Lee 645 N.W.2d 459 Minn. 2002
- State v. Pippitt 645 N.W.2d 87 Minn. 2002
- State v. Pippitt 645 N.W.2d 87 Minn. 2002