Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Nunn, 561 N.W.2d 902.
- State v. Fields 679 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2004
- State v. Moua 678 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 2004
- State v. Moua 678 N.W.2d 29 Minn. 2004
- State v. Richardson 670 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2003
- State v. Richardson 670 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2003
- State v. DeShay 669 N.W.2d 878 Minn. 2003
- State v. Lopez-Rios 669 N.W.2d 603 Minn. 2003
-
State v. Lopez-Rios
669 N.W.2d 603
Minn. 2003
“ ‘Reversal is warranted only when the error substantially influences the jury’s decision.’ ” DeShay, d at 888 ().
-
State v. DeShay
669 N.W.2d 878
Minn. 2003
“ ‘Reversal is warranted only when the error substantially influences the jury’s decision.’ ” ().
- State v. Manley 664 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 2003
- State v. Manley 664 N.W.2d 275 Minn. 2003
- State v. Amos 658 N.W.2d 201 Minn. 2003
- State v. Amos 658 N.W.2d 201 Minn. 2003
- State v. Chomnarith 654 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2003
- State v. Chomnarith 654 N.W.2d 660 Minn. 2003
- State v. Valentine 630 N.W.2d 429 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
- State v. Valentine 630 N.W.2d 429 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
- State v. Martin 614 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 2000
- State v. Martin 614 N.W.2d 214 Minn. 2000
- State v. Bakken 604 N.W.2d 106 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
-
State v. Bakken
604 N.W.2d 106
Minn. Ct. App. 2000
-09 (Minn.1997), the supreme court interpreted Rule 801(d)(1)(B) and noted that prior consistent statements are not automatically admissible under the rule.
- In Re the Welfare of K.A.S. 585 N.W.2d 71 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
- In Re the Welfare of K.A.S. 585 N.W.2d 71 Minn. Ct. App. 1998