Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Robinson v. State, 567 N.W.2d 491.
- State v. Green 719 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 2006
- State v. Green 719 N.W.2d 664 Minn. 2006
- Schleicher v. State 718 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 2006
-
Schleicher v. State
718 N.W.2d 440
Minn. 2006
4 “ ‘It is well settled that a party may not raise issues for the first time on appeal’ from denial of postconviction relief.” ( , 494 n. 2 (Minn.1997)).
- Azure v. State 700 N.W.2d 443 Minn. 2005
-
Azure v. State
700 N.W.2d 443
Minn. 2005
494 n. 2 (Minn.1997); -17 (Minn.1982).
- Carney v. State 692 N.W.2d 888 Minn. 2005
-
Carney v. State
692 N.W.2d 888
Minn. 2005
But, under the second Knaffla exception, a claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel known but not raised at the time of direct appeal may be brought in a postcon-viction petition if the claim cannot be “evaluated by an appellate court on direct appeal based on the briefs and trial court transcript, without any additional factfind-ing.” (“A claim of ineffective assistance of trial counsel that can be decided on the basis of the trial court record must be brought on direct appeal and is pr
- Torres v. State 688 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2004
- Torres v. State 688 N.W.2d 569 Minn. 2004
- Shoen v. State 648 N.W.2d 228 Minn. 2002
- Shoen v. State 648 N.W.2d 228 Minn. 2002
- Townsend v. State 646 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 2002
- Townsend v. State 646 N.W.2d 218 Minn. 2002
- Robledo-Kinney v. State 637 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2002
- Robledo-Kinney v. State 637 N.W.2d 581 Minn. 2002
- Dukes v. State 621 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2001
- Explained Dukes v. State 621 N.W.2d 246 Minn. 2001
- City of Golden Valley v. One 1998 Pontiac Grand Prix, Vin 1g2wp521wf309530, Pennsylvania License Plate P520111 616 N.W.2d 780 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
-
City of Golden Valley v. One 1998 Pontiac Grand Prix, Vin 1g2wp521wf309530, Pennsylvania License Plate P520111
616 N.W.2d 780
Minn. Ct. App. 2000
“Findings of fact are considered clearly erroneous only if they are not reasonably supported by the evidence.” Id.; (holding reversal not warranted unless “reviewing court is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been made”); (“In general, a trial court’s findings of fact will not be disturbed unless clearly erroneous.”).
- State v. Gustafson 610 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 2000
-
State v. Gustafson
610 N.W.2d 314
Minn. 2000
494 & n. 3 (Minn. 1997); , 85 n. 1 (Minn.1997).
- Jihad v. State 594 N.W.2d 522 Minn. 1999
-
Jihad v. State
594 N.W.2d 522
Minn. 1999
(barring ineffective assistance of trial counsel argument under Knaffla rule because it “could have been raised on direct appeal”); (noting appellant raised issue of ineffective counsel in pro se supplemental brief).
- Zenanko v. State 587 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 1998
- Zenanko v. State 587 N.W.2d 642 Minn. 1998
- Wilson v. State 582 N.W.2d 882 Minn. 1998
- State v. Gisege 582 N.W.2d 229 Minn. 1998
- State v. Gisege 582 N.W.2d 229 Minn. 1998
-
Wilson v. State
582 N.W.2d 882
Minn. 1998
(holding that a petitioner’s claim that his trial counsel was ineffective for failing to communicate two plea offers required additional factfinding and therefore such a claim was properly raised in his petition for postconviction relief).
- State v. Keeton 573 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
- State v. Keeton 573 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 1997