Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
18 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2016 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Ihnotgreen2 sentences2016State v. Ihnot, 575 N.W.2d 581, 584 (Minn. 1998). 2015State v. Ihnot, 575 N.W.2d 581, 584 (Minn. 1998). | 7 | 8 |
State v. Swansongreen2 sentences2016“A district court’s ruling on the admissibility of prior convictions for impeachment of a defendant is reviewed under a clear abuse of discretion standard.” State v. Swanson, 707 N.W.2d 645, 654 (Minn. 2006). 2016“A district court’s ruling on the admissibility of prior convictions for impeachment of a defendant is reviewed under a clear abuse of discretion standard.” Swanson, 707 N.W.2d at 654 . | 5 | 5 |
In Re the Welfare of D.M.D.green2 sentences1994In re Welfare of D.M.D., 438 N.W.2d 713, 715 (Minn.App.1989). 1994In re Welfare of D.M.D., 438 N.W.2d 713, 715 (Minn.App.1989). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Hillgreen1 sentence2016“Five factors guide the exercise of a district court’s discretion under Rule 609(a).” State v. Hill, 801 N.W.2d 646, 653 (Minn. 2011) (citing State v. Jones, 271 N.W.2d 534, 538 (Minn.1978)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Jonesgreen1 sentence2016“Five factors guide the exercise of a district court’s discretion under Rule 609(a).” State v. Hill, 801 N.W.2d 646, 653 (Minn. 2011) (citing State v. Jones, 271 N.W.2d 534, 538 (Minn.1978)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Chambleegreen1 sentence2006State v. Chamblee, 407 N.W.2d 721, 722 (Minn.App.1987). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Olsongreen1 sentence1998State v. Olson, 325 N.W.2d 13, 18 (Minn.1982) (imposing a sentence within the limits prescribed by the legislature properly lies with the judiciary). | 1 | 1 |
Lamberton v. Lambertongreen2 sentences1989Lamberton v. Lamberton, 229 Minn. 29, 31-32 , 38 N.W.2d 72, 74 (1949). 1989Lamberton v. Lamberton, 229 Minn. 29, 31-32 , 38 N.W.2d 72, 74 (1949). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.