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.
9 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1971–2025 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Erickson v. Stategreen2 sentences2015When a petition for postconviction relief is filed, “the court shall promptly set an early hearing on the petition and response thereto, and promptly determine the issues” “[u]nless the petition and the files and records of the proceeding conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief.” Minn. Stat. § 590.04 , subd. 1 (2014); see Erickson v. State, 842 N.W.2d 314, 318 (Minn. 2014). 2015Lastly, appellant argues that the district court abused its discretion when it denied his request for an evidentiary hearing based on the newly discovered evidence and interest-of-justice exceptions.1 When a petition for postconviction relief is filed, “the court shall promptly set an early hearing on the petition and response thereto, and promptly determine the issues” unless the “petition and the files and records of the proceeding conclusively show that the petitioner is entitled to no relief.” Minn. Stat. § 590.04 , subd. 1; see Erickson v. State, 842 N.W.2d 314, 318 (Minn. 2014). | 2 | 2 |
Bobo v. Stategreen1 sentence2025A district court may summarily deny a petition without holding an evidentiary hearing when “the petitioner alleges facts that, if true, are legally insufficient to grant the requested relief.” State v. Sardina-Padilla, 7 N.W.3d 585, 602–03 (Minn. 2024); Reese v. State, 992 N.W.2d 373 , 378 (Minn. 2023); see also Bobo v. State, 820 N.W.2d 511, 517 (Minn. 2012). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Knafflagreen2 sentences2016Minn. Stat. § 590.04 , subd. 1 (2014). “[W]here direct appeal has once been taken, all matters raised therein, and all claims known but not raised, will not be considered upon a subsequent petition for postconviction relief.” State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252 , 243 N.W.2d 737, 741 (1976); see also Minn. Stat. § 590.04 , subd. 3 (2014) (“The court may summarily deny a second or successive petition for similar relief on behalf of the same petitioner and may summarily deny a petition when the issues raised in it have previously been decided by [an appellate court] in the same case.”). 2016Minn. Stat. § 590.04 , subd. 1 (2014). “[W]here direct appeal has once been taken, all matters raised therein, and all claims known but not raised, will not be considered upon a subsequent petition for postconviction relief.” State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252 , 243 N.W.2d 737, 741 (1976); see also Minn. Stat. § 590.04 , subd. 3 (2014) (“The court may summarily deny a second or successive petition for similar relief on behalf of the same petitioner and may summarily deny a petition when the issues raised in it have previously been decided by [an appellate court] in the same case.”). | 1 | 1 |
Roby v. Stategreen1 sentence2003A petitioner must allege facts that “if proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence, entitle him to relief.” State v. Rhodes, 627 N.W.2d 74, 86 (Minn.2001) (quoting Roby v. State, 531 N.W.2d 482, 483 (Minn.1995)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Rhodesgreen1 sentence2003A petitioner must allege facts that “if proven by a fair preponderance of the evidence, entitle him to relief.” State v. Rhodes, 627 N.W.2d 74, 86 (Minn.2001) (quoting Roby v. State, 531 N.W.2d 482, 483 (Minn.1995)). | 1 | 1 |
Fratzke v. Stategreen1 sentence1996Minn.Stat. § 590.04, subd. 1 (1996) (emphasis added); see also Fratzke, 450 N.W.2d at 102-103 (holding that an evidentiary hearing is not required unless facts are alleged which, if proved, would entitle a petitioner to the requested relief). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Nicks
green
2 sentences2015The threshold standard for an evidentiary hearing is lower than that for a new trial; “[a]ny doubts about whether to conduct an evidentiary hearing should be resolved in 8 favor of the defendant seeking relief.” Nicks, 831 N.W.2d at 504 . 2015The threshold standard for an evidentiary hearing is lower than that for a new trial; “[a]ny doubts about whether to conduct an evidentiary hearing should be resolved in favor of the defendant seeking relief.” Nicks, 831 N.W.2d at 504 . | 2 | 2015–2015 |
State of Minnesota v. Angel Ignacio Sardina-Padilla
green
1 sentence2025A district court may summarily deny a petition without holding an evidentiary hearing when “the petitioner alleges facts that, if true, are legally insufficient to grant the requested relief.” State v. Sardina-Padilla, 7 N.W.3d 585, 602–03 (Minn. 2024); Reese v. State, 992 N.W.2d 373 , 378 (Minn. 2023); see also Bobo v. State, 820 N.W.2d 511, 517 (Minn. 2012). | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Woodruff v. 2008 Mercedes
green
1 sentence2015“Any doubts about whether to conduct an evidentiary hearing should be resolved in favor of the defendant seeking relief.” Nicks, 831 N.W.2d 9 at 504 . | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Wells Fargo & Co.
green
2 sentences1985State v. Wells Fargo & Co., 146 Minn. 444 , 179 N.W. 221 (1920). 1985State v. Wells Fargo & Co., 146 Minn. 444 , 179 N.W. 221 (1920). | 1 | 1985–1985 |
In re Improvement of Lake of the Isles Park
neutral
2 sentences1971In In re Improvement of Lake of the Isles Park, 152 Minn. 29 , 188 N. W. 54 , the issue arose in the assessment for construction of the parkway around Lake of the Isles and Lake Calhoun, two Minneapolis lakes which are connected by a lagoon. 1971In In re Improvement of Lake of the Isles Park, 152 Minn. 29 , 188 N. W. 54 , the issue arose in the assessment for construction of the parkway around Lake of the Isles and Lake Calhoun, two Minneapolis lakes which are connected by a lagoon. | 1 | 1971–1971 |
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.