Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Myers, 359 N.W.2d 604.

220 citing documents.

  • State v. Williams 451 N.W.2d 886 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Williams 451 N.W.2d 886 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Mosby 450 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Mosby 450 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Ingold 450 N.W.2d 344 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Ingold 450 N.W.2d 344 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
    While the admission of expert testimony rests within the discretion of the trial court, that decision will be reversed upon a showing of “apparent error.”
  • State v. Ronnebaum 446 N.W.2d 699 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • State v. Ronnebaum 446 N.W.2d 699 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • State v. Lanam 444 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • State v. Lanam 444 N.W.2d 882 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
    See, (e.g. uncertainty of accusation, possible recantations, vague time periods and delay in reporting).
  • State v. Conklin 444 N.W.2d 268 Minn. 1989
  • Seelye v. State 429 N.W.2d 669 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • Seelye v. State 429 N.W.2d 669 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Cain 427 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Cain 427 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Coleman 426 N.W.2d 889 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Coleman 426 N.W.2d 889 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Shamp 422 N.W.2d 520 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Davis 422 N.W.2d 296 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Shamp 422 N.W.2d 520 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    Corroboration of a child’s allegations is required “only if the evidence otherwise adduced is insufficient to sustain conviction.”
  • State v. Davis 422 N.W.2d 296 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    (clinical psychologist with Ph.D and about 60 active cases); (same psychologist).
  • State v. Dana 422 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 1988
  • State v. Dana 422 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 1988
  • State v. Dana 416 N.W.2d 147 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Dana 416 N.W.2d 147 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Axford 417 N.W.2d 88 Minn. 1987
  • State v. Axford 417 N.W.2d 88 Minn. 1987
    -10 (Minn.1984), we' attempted to explain why children in incestuous families often delay reporting the incest and why jurors may be helped by expert testimony.
  • State v. Haala 415 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Haala 415 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Potter v. State 410 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • Potter v. State 410 N.W.2d 364 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    (expert testimony regarding truth or falsity of a witness’s allegations about a crime is improper).
  • State v. Hall 406 N.W.2d 503 Minn. 1987
  • State v. Hall 406 N.W.2d 503 Minn. 1987
    we held that it is within the trial court’s discretion to admit expert testimony describing the traits and characteristics typically observed in sexually abused children.
  • State v. Garden 404 N.W.2d 912 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Garden 404 N.W.2d 912 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    the Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the admission of the same psychologist’s testimony concerning the emotional and psychological characteristics she had observed in sexually abused children.
  • State v. Blair 402 N.W.2d 154 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Blair 402 N.W.2d 154 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    However, “[cjorroboration of an allegation of sexual abuse of a child is required only if the evidence otherwise adduced is insufficient to sustain conviction.”
  • State v. McCoy 400 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. McCoy 400 N.W.2d 807 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Moran 728 P.2d 248 Ariz. 1986
  • State v. Hall 392 N.W.2d 285 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Sandberg 392 N.W.2d 298 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Hall 392 N.W.2d 285 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Sandberg 392 N.W.2d 298 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Roberts 393 N.W.2d 385 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Roberts 393 N.W.2d 385 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Campa 390 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Campa 390 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Larson 389 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1986
  • State v. Larson 389 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 1986