Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Tomlin, 622 N.W.2d 546.

33 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Justin Patrick Allen Weston Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Justin Patrick Allen Weston Minn. Ct. App. 2024
at 877; (applying Krawsky and concluding that defendant’s lies to police did not rise to the level of fighting words and did not constitute obstructing legal process because defendant’s lies and omissions did not physically obstruct officers during their i
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“Because the meaning of a criminal statute is intertwined with the issue of whether the State proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant violated the statute, it is often necessary to interpret a criminal statute when evaluating an insufficiency -of-the- evidence claim.” State v. Vasko , (addressing a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge and stating, “it is necessary to first determine what evidence is required” for a statutory criminal conviction, which “is an issue of statutory inter
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Anthony James Olgeirson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Vernon Dale Howard, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Vernon Dale Howard, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(dispositive statutory- interpretation issue was raised by defendant and determined by district court in defendant’s pretrial motion to dismiss for lack of probable cause); -49 (Minn. 2001) (the supreme court relied on its previous construction of a charging statute).
State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko 889 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko 889 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Michael Douglas Metsala Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Michael Douglas Metsala Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Obstruction occurs when a defendant’s act has “the effect of physically obstructing or interfering with an officer conducting an investigation.”
State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dragos Valentine Bogza Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dragos Valentine Bogza Minn. Ct. App. 2016
stopped dating six months before the alleged assault.” Although framed in terms of sufficiency of the evidence, appellant’s argument requires us to first consider the statutory interpretation of the phrase “significant romantic or sexual relationship.” (noting that before considering whether evidence was sufficient it was necessary to first determine what evidence is required for a conviction of obstructing legal process).
State of Minnesota v. Paula Jean Yackel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Paula Jean Yackel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(holding that appellant did not obstruct legal process by telling lies to investigating officers, which lengthened and diverted investigation).
State v. Pederson 840 N.W.2d 433 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
State v. Pederson 840 N.W.2d 433 Minn. Ct. App. 2013
See, (holding that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction under either subdivision when the defendant’s conduct of lying to police did not physically obstruct an investigation); Patch, d at 540 (concluding that conduct of assisting a person with outstanding warrants, which was commi
State v. Morin 736 N.W.2d 691 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Morin 736 N.W.2d 691 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
(holding that defendant’s lies to police, although they may have interrupted or prolonged the investigation, did not physically obstruct the officers and, therefore, did not constitute obstruction of legal process); (stating that due process
State v. Manypenny 662 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Manypenny 662 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. LORSUNG 658 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. LORSUNG 658 N.W.2d 215 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Soukup 656 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Soukup 656 N.W.2d 424 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Colosimo 648 N.W.2d 271 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Colosimo 648 N.W.2d 271 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
The district court dismissed the obstruction charge, holding that Colo-simo acted in good faith to assert his constitutional rights and no physical obstruction occurred
State v. Ihle 640 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2002
State v. Ihle 640 N.W.2d 910 Minn. 2002
we applied the holding of Krawsky and concluded that Tomlin’s lies to the police did not constitute obstruction of legal process, because his lies and omissions did not physically obstruct the officers during their investigation.