Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Flores, 418 N.W.2d 150.

185 citing documents.

Samuel David Berg v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Samuel David Berg v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In doing so, we review jury instructions as a whole “to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
More specifically, appellate courts review jury instructions as a whole “to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
d 150, 155 (Minn. 1988).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Jury instructions are reviewed as a whole “to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
, A22-0103 Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Jury instru ctions must, in their entirety, “fairly and adequately explain[] the law of the case.” d 150, 155 (Minn. 1988).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
We review jury inst ructions “in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.” State v. Flores
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Jury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequate ly explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Although courts may favor the use of CRIMJIG s, their use is not mandatory.” (stating that although district court may preferably use CRIMJIG, jury instruction fairly and adequately explained law and was not error).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and 9 adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
This court reviews jury instructions “in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained th e law of the case.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
John Mark Hentges v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
John Mark Hentges v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Eggermont Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Eggermont Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Manuel Demmings Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Manuel Demmings Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota v. True Thao 875 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. True Thao 875 N.W.2d 834 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michelle MacDonald Shimota 875 N.W.2d 363 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michelle MacDonald Shimota 875 N.W.2d 363 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Melody June Fay Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Melody June Fay Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Niles Hubbard Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Niles Hubbard Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Delbert Keith Sybrandt Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Delbert Keith Sybrandt Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.” d 150, 155 (Minn. 1998).
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Gary Mason Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Gary Mason Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ricky James Bedell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ricky James Bedell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota v. Roosevelt Hunter 857 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Roosevelt Hunter 857 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
When determining whether they are erroneous, “the jury instructions must be reviewed as a whole.”
State of Minnesota v. Dayna Kristine Bell Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Dayna Kristine Bell Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
State of Minnesota v. Enamidem Celestine Okon Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Enamidem Celestine Okon Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[J]ury instructions must be viewed in their entirety to determine whether they fairly and adequately explained the law of the case.”
Gulbertson v. State 843 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 2014
Gulbertson v. State 843 N.W.2d 240 Minn. 2014
District courts have considerable latitude in the selection of the exact language of the instructions, and instructions will be reviewed as a whole to determine if they fairly and adequately explain the law

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by