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.
17 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 2009–2024 5 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. McDanielgreen2 sentences2016For objected-to prosecutorial misconduct, this court applies a two-tiered harmless-error test, “the application of which varies based on the severity of the misconduct.” State v. McDaniel, 777 N.W.2d 739, 749 (Minn.2010) (quotation omitted). 8 Serious misconduct is “harmless, beyond a reasonable doubt if the verdict rendered was surely unattributable to the error,” while less serious misconduct is harmless unless “the misconduct likely played a substantial part in influencing the jury to convict.” State v. Powers, 654 N.W.2d 667, 678 (Minn.2003) (quotations omitted). 2015For objected-to prosecutorial misconduct, this court applies a two-tiered harmless-error test, “the application of which varies based on the severity of the misconduct.” 2 State v. McDaniel, 777 N.W.2d 739, 749 (Minn. 2010) ( quotation omitted). | 3 | 5 |
State v. Carongreen2 sentences2024See State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974) (stating that the two-tiered harmless-error test applies to cases where the defendant objects to the alleged prosecutorial misconduct). 2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). | 3 | 4 |
State v. Yanggreen2 sentences2015Id. 2015We review objected-to claims of prosecutorial misconduct under “a two-tiered harmless-error test.” State v. Yang, 774 N.W.2d 539, 559 (Minn. 2009). “[C]ases than one cannabinoid beyond THC, as is required by the BCA’s standard operating procedures to classify a substance as hashish. | 3 | 4 |
State v. Carridinegreen2 sentences2016State v. Carridine, 812 N.W.2d 130, 146 (Minn. 2012). 2016State v. Carridine, 812 N.W.2d 130, 146 (Minn. 2012). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Powersgreen2 sentences2016For objected-to prosecutorial misconduct, this court applies a two-tiered harmless-error test, “the application of which varies based on the severity of the misconduct.” State v. McDaniel, 777 N.W.2d 739, 749 (Minn.2010) (quotation omitted). 8 Serious misconduct is “harmless, beyond a reasonable doubt if the verdict rendered was surely unattributable to the error,” while less serious misconduct is harmless unless “the misconduct likely played a substantial part in influencing the jury to convict.” State v. Powers, 654 N.W.2d 667, 678 (Minn.2003) (quotations omitted). 2015Serious misconduct is “harmless beyond a reasonable doubt if the verdict rendered was surely unattributable to the error,” while less serious misconduct is harmless unless “the misconduct likely played a substantial part in influencing the jury to convict.” State v. Powers, 654 N.W.2d 667, 678 (Minn. 2003) (quotation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Rameygreen2 sentences2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). 2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Jacksongreen1 sentence2024In particular, “[w]hen an objection is made and [the appellate court] conclude[s] the prosecutor committed misconduct, [the appellate court] appl[ies] a two-tiered harmless-error analysis.” State v. Jackson, 773 N.W.2d 111, 121 (Minn. 2009). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Martingreen1 sentence2024Under that test, in cases involving “unusually serious prosecutorial misconduct,” we determine “whether it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” State v. Martin, 773 N.W.2d 89, 104 (Minn. 2009). | 1 | 1 |
State of Minnesota v. Vidale Lee Whitson, Vidale Lee Whitson v. State of Minnesota, C5-02-2108green2 sentences2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). 2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Stewardgreen1 sentence2016See State v. Steward, 645 N.W.2d 115, 121 (Minn.2002) (citing State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127 , 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (1974)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wrengreen1 sentence2009State v. Wren, 738 N.W.2d 378, 389-90 (Minn.2007). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Carongreen2 sentences2024See State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974) (stating that the two-tiered harmless-error test applies to cases where the defendant objects to the alleged prosecutorial misconduct). 2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). | 1 | 4 |
State v. Rameygreen2 sentences2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). 2024State v. Caron, 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (Minn. 1974), abrogated on other grounds by State v. Ramey, 721 N.W.2d 294, 298-99 (Minn. 2006); State v. Whitson, 876 N.W.2d 297, 304 (Minn. 2016); see also Woodard v. State, 994 N.W.2d 272 , 277 n.2 (Minn. 2023) (indicating that the two-tiered harmless-error test is applicable in cases involving objected-to prosecutorial misconduct). | 1 | 2 |
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.