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.
12 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1997–2016 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. Knafflagreen2 sentences2016The court also held, in the alternative, that our rule in State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246 , 243 N.W.2d 737 (1976), and its recent statutory counterparts, Minn.Stat. §§ 590.01, subds. *604 1, 3 (2014), barred the petition. 2 This appeal follows. ■ On appeal, Brocks argues that his petition was not untimely and that the Knajfla rule does not. bar the petition. 2016The court also held, in the alternative, that our rule in State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246 , 243 N.W.2d 737 (1976), and its recent statutory counterparts, Minn.Stat. §§ 590.01, subds. *604 1, 3 (2014), barred the petition. 2 This appeal follows. ■ On appeal, Brocks argues that his petition was not untimely and that the Knajfla rule does not. bar the petition. | 2 | 4 |
Darryl Colbert v. State of Minnesotagreen2 sentences2016Colbert, 870 N.W.2d at 626 ; see also State *215 v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252 , 243 N.W.2d 737, 741 (1976), The Knaffla rule also bars all claims that were known or should have been known at the time of the direct appeal. 3 Colbert, 870 N.W.2d at 626 . 2016Colbert, 870 N.W.2d at 626 ; see also State *215 v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252 , 243 N.W.2d 737, 741 (1976), The Knaffla rule also bars all claims that were known or should have been known at the time of the direct appeal. 3 Colbert, 870 N.W.2d at 626 . | 1 | 1 |
Evans v. Stategreen2 sentences2015Under the interests-of-justice exception to the Knajfla rule, the court may review a claim as fairness requires when the claim has substantive merit and the petitioner did not deliberately and inexcusably fail to raise the issue in the direct appeal or a previous postconviction petition. 9 Evans v. State, 788 N.W.2d 38, 44 (Minn.2010). 2015Under the interests-of-justice exception to the Knajfla rule, the court may review a claim as fairness requires when the claim has substantive merit and the petitioner did not deliberately and inexcusably fail to raise the issue in the direct appeal or a previous postconviction petition. 9 Evans v. State, 788 N.W.2d 38, 44 (Minn.2010). | 1 | 1 |
Spears v. Stategreen1 sentence2009Powers II, 731 N.W.2d at 502 ; see also Spears v. State, 725 N.W.2d 696, 701 (Minn.2006) (“Because Spears’s Apprendi claims have substantive merit and his failure to raise them on direct appeal was not deliberate or inexcusable, we hold that the court of appeals erred in determining that Spears’s Apprendi claims were proeedurally barred.”). 14 A. Sufficiency of the Evidence In his first claim, Hurd argues that the evidence is not sufficient to estab *26 lish beyond a reasonable doubt that he killed Linnerooth. | 1 | 1 |
Perry v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Perry v. State, 705 N.W.2d 572, 574 (Minn.2005) (quoting Taylor v. State, 691 N.W.2d 78, 79 (Minn.2005)). 2007Perry v. State, 705 N.W.2d 572, 574 (Minn.2005) (quoting Taylor v. State, 691 N.W.2d 78, 79 (Minn.2005)). | 1 | 1 |
Schneider v. Stategreen2 sentences2007See Schneider v. State, 725 N.W.2d 516, 521 (Minn.2007). 2007See Schneider v. State, 725 N.W.2d 516, 521 (Minn.2007). | 1 | 1 |
Taylor v. Stategreen2 sentences2007Perry v. State, 705 N.W.2d 572, 574 (Minn.2005) (quoting Taylor v. State, 691 N.W.2d 78, 79 (Minn.2005)). 2007Perry v. State, 705 N.W.2d 572, 574 (Minn.2005) (quoting Taylor v. State, 691 N.W.2d 78, 79 (Minn.2005)). | 1 | 1 |
Washington v. Stategreen1 sentence2005Washington v. State, 675 N.W.2d 628, 630 (Minn.2004). | 1 | 1 |
Hale v. Stategreen1 sentence2002See Hale, 566 N.W.2d at 926 (citing “Knajfla rule” that issues defendant knew or should have known but did not raise at time of direct appeal will not be considered in later petitions for postconviction relief). | 1 | 1 |
Russell v. Stategreen2 sentences1998Russell v. State, 562 N.W.2d 670, 672 (Minn.1997). 1998Russell v. State, 562 N.W.2d 670, 672 (Minn.1997). | 1 | 1 |
Roby v. Stategreen2 sentences1997Roby v. State, 531 N.W.2d 482, 484 (Minn.1995) (citing Case v. State, 364 N.W.2d 797, 799-800 (Minn.1985)). 1997Roby v. State, 531 N.W.2d 482, 484 (Minn.1995) (citing Case v. State, 364 N.W.2d 797, 799-800 (Minn.1985)). | 1 | 1 |
Case v. Stategreen2 sentences1997Roby v. State, 531 N.W.2d 482, 484 (Minn.1995) (citing Case v. State, 364 N.W.2d 797, 799-800 (Minn.1985)). 1997Roby v. State, 531 N.W.2d 482, 484 (Minn.1995) (citing Case v. State, 364 N.W.2d 797, 799-800 (Minn.1985)). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Jama v. State
green
2 sentences2016In so ruling, the posteonviction court relied on a decision by the court of appeals, Jama v. State, 756 N.W.2d 107 (Minn.App.2008). 2016In so ruling, the posteonviction court relied on a decision by the court of appeals, Jama v. State, 756 N.W.2d 107 (Minn.App.2008). | 1 | 2016–2016 |
Powers v. State
green
1 sentence2009Powers II, 731 N.W.2d at 502 ; see also Spears v. State, 725 N.W.2d 696, 701 (Minn.2006) (“Because Spears’s Apprendi claims have substantive merit and his failure to raise them on direct appeal was not deliberate or inexcusable, we hold that the court of appeals erred in determining that Spears’s Apprendi claims were proeedurally barred.”). 14 A. Sufficiency of the Evidence In his first claim, Hurd argues that the evidence is not sufficient to estab *26 lish beyond a reasonable doubt that he killed Linnerooth. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
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.