Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Cram, 718 N.W.2d 898.

30 citing documents.

Dpree Shareef Robinson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
To prevail on a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must satisfy two requirements: “ that counsel’s performance was deficient” and “that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); -07 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Dylan Robert Simmons Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-07 (Minn. 2006) (applying Strickland to an ineffective-assistance claim regarding restitution).
State of Minnesota v. Casey Love Minn. Ct. App. 2026
” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); - 07 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Raymond Boy Strong Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In the Matter of the Welfare of: K. A. A., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2025
see State v. Cram , d 898, 906 (Minn. 2006) (applying Strickland to claim of ineffective assistance regarding restitution).
State of Minnesota v. Bradley Martin Woida Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“When an error does not implicate a constitutional right, we ask whether ‘there is a reasonable possibility that the wrongfully admitted evidence significantly affected the verdict.’” d 161, 189 (Minn. 2024) ( n.1 (Minn. 2006)).
In the Matter of the Welfare of: C.L.B., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(applying Strickland to claim of ineffective assistance regarding restitution).
State of Minnesota v. Kristi Dannette Mcneilly 6 N.W.3d 161 Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Kristi Dannette Mcneilly 6 N.W.3d 161 Minn. 2024
When an error does not implicate a constitutional right, we ask whether “there is a reasonable possibility that the wrongfully admitted evidence significantly affected the verdict.” n.1 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Perry Evan Helms, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense.” Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); d 898, 906-07 (Minn. 2006).
Randall Ferrell Decker v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); d 898, 906-07 (Minn. 2006).
Alexander James Ray v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. James David Wren Minn. Ct. App. 2022
(holding that the defendant has the burden of proof on both prongs of an ineffective -assistance claim).
In the Matter of the Welfare of: K. A. H., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2022
5 that counsel’s failure to submit a closing argument did not result in structural error); State v. Cram , -08 (Minn. 2006) (c oncluding that counsel’s failure to submit evidence or argument regarding restit ution did not result in structural error); see also Cooper v. State , (concluding that counsel’s failure to have a sign language interpreter present during some of their commu
State of Minnesota v. Ronnie Bila Shaka Minn. Ct. App. 2021
16 Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687, 104 S. Ct. at 2064; -07 (Minn. 2006) (applying Strickland).
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Allen Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Amos, d at 203 ; (stating that even if district court abuses its discretion, “the decision will not be reversed if it is found to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” (quotation omitted)).
Brittany Ann Vacko v. State of Minnesota (A18-2038), Eric Joseph Vacko, vs. State of Minnesota (A18-2039) Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Strickland, 466 U.S. at 687, 104 S. Ct. at 2064 ; -07 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Marland Len Corr, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(stating that even if the district court abuses its discretion, “the decision will not be reversed if it is found to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt” (quotation omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joel Spiegel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joel Spiegel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Steven Joseph Mahne Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Steven Joseph Mahne Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(d 807, 813 (Minn. 1989)).
State of Minnesota v. Amir Abd El Malak Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Amir Abd El Malak Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Nor do his submissions overcome the “strong presumption” that counsel’s performance fell “within the wide range of reasonable professional assistance.” (quotation omitted).
Royal Jay Toney v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Royal Jay Toney v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Zais 805 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 2011
State v. Zais 805 N.W.2d 32 Minn. 2011
See, , 904 n. 2 (Minn.2006) (concluding that in a prosecution of a husband for the murder of his wife, statements made by the wife to the husband were admissible).
Rhodes v. State 735 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 2007
Rhodes v. State 735 N.W.2d 315 Minn. 2007
(internal quotation marks omitted).