DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Hernandez v. State, 408 N.W.2d 623.

15 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
    If the “record reveals careful interrogation by the trial court and the defendant had full opportunity to consult with his counsel before entering his plea, the court may safely presume that the defendant was adequately informed of his rights.” ().
  • State of Minnesota v. Brent William Kruse Minn. Ct. App. 2024
  • State of Minnesota v. Brent William Kruse Minn. Ct. App. 2024
    Likewise, we have held that “a [district] court is not required to inform a defendant of all his constitutional rights before accepting the guilty plea.”
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    istinguishes his case from Doughman because he had no written plea petition.2 But whether or not there was a plea petition, if the “record reveals careful interrogation by the [district] court and the defendant had full opportunity to consult with his counsel before entering his plea, the court may safely presume that the defendant was adequately informed of his rights.” (citing State v. Propotnik , ).
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
    If the “record reveals careful interrogation by the trial court and the defendant had full opportunity to consult with his counsel before entering his plea, the court may safely presume that the defendant was adequately informed of his rights.” ().
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
    If the “record reveals careful interrogation by the trial court and the defendant had full opportunity to consult with his counsel before entering his plea, the court may safely presume that the defendant was adequately informed of his rights.” Hernandez v. 6 State, (citing State v. Propotnik , d 637, 638 (Minn. 1974)).
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
    See Hernandez v. State , (assuming that defendant had been adequately informed of rights when he had a full opportunity to consult with counsel).
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
    If the “record reveals careful interrogation by the [district] court and the defendant had full opportunity to consult with [her] counsel before entering [her] plea, the court may safely presume that the defendant was adequately informed of [her] rights.”
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
    If the “record reveals careful interrogation by the trial court and the defendant had full opportunity to consult with his counsel before entering his plea, the court may safely presume that the defendant was adequately informed of his rights.” ().
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
  • In the Matter of the Welfare of: S.L.S., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
  • In the Matter of the Welfare of: S.L.S., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
    and the consequences that will follow a plea of guilty or not guilty.”); State v. Propotnik, 299 Minn. 56, 58, (“[S]ince the record shows that defendant had full opportunity to consult with his counsel before entering his plea, we may safely presume that counsel informed him adequately concerning [his right to confront his accusers at trial.]”); d 623, 626 (Minn. App. 1987) (where a trial court examines a defendant who had full opportunity to consult with counsel, the court may safely presume th