DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Blasus, 445 N.W.2d 535.

64 citing documents.

  • State v. Lee 494 N.W.2d 475 Minn. 1993
  • State v. Lee 480 N.W.2d 668 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • State v. Lee 480 N.W.2d 668 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
    (questioning expert witness about participation in notorious and highly publicized prosecutions required reversal in close factual case).
  • State v. Naylor 474 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 1991
  • State v. Naylor 474 N.W.2d 314 Minn. 1991
  • State v. Stallings 474 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. Stallings 474 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
    (statements under oath and subject to cross-examination sufficiently reliable under rule 804(b)(5), unlike an unsworn ex parte statement to police).
  • Fox v. State 474 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1991
  • Fox v. State 474 N.W.2d 821 Minn. 1991
    3 (1990); Wieland, d at 714
  • Hunt v. Regents of the University of Minnesota 460 N.W.2d 28 Minn. 1990
  • Wieland v. State 457 N.W.2d 712 Minn. 1990
  • Wieland v. State 457 N.W.2d 712 Minn. 1990
    2 Additionally, we have held that “[generally expert testimony does not constitute newly discovered evidence warranting a new trial.” (citation omitted); cf. Swanson v. Williams, 303 Minn. 433, 436 , -63 (1975).
  • Hunt v. Regents of University 446 N.W.2d 400 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • Hunt v. Regents of University 446 N.W.2d 400 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
    (Kelley, J., dissenting); see also McCormick on Evidence, ch. 5, § 40 (E. Cleary 3d ed. 1984).