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.
7 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1988–2006 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. Parkergreen2 sentences1988State v. Parker, 417 N.W.2d 643, 647 (Minn.1988). 2 The court of appeals based its conclusion that the lack of a cautionary instruction was prejudicial on the fact that “it cannot be said with certainty that the jury did not base its finding of guilt partially on the 1978 or 1979 incident.” State v. Shamp, 422 N.W.2d 736, 739 (Minn.App.1988). 3 In *231 fact, there was not just one incident in 1978 or one incident in 1979. 1988State v. Parker, 417 N.W.2d 643, 647 (Minn.1988). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Shampgreen2 sentences1990Shamp, 427 N.W.2d at 230 (footnote omitted). 1990In State v. Shamp, 427 N.W.2d 228 (Minn.1988), we held that under the plain error rule the defendant there could obtain relief from the trial court’s failure to caution the jury not to base any verdict of guilt on conduct occurring outside the statute of limitations only if the trial court’s failure seriously affected substantial rights and only if the error was prejudicial error. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Gliddengreen1 sentence2006Plain error exists “only if the trial court’s failure seriously affected substantial rights and only if the error was prejudicial error.” State v. Glidden, 455 N.W.2d 744, 747 (Minn.1990). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Carongreen2 sentences1992As we said in State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127 , 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (1974), “the more serious the [error], the more certain of its effect this court has felt that it should be before labeling the error harmless.” The witnesses’ opinion that complainant was “sincere” when she said she had been raped in this case was what one would expect the witnesses to say, and was unlikely to have been given much, if any, weight by the jury. 1992As we said in State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127 , 218 N.W.2d 197, 200 (1974), “the more serious the [error], the more certain of its effect this court has felt that it should be before labeling the error harmless.” The witnesses’ opinion that complainant was “sincere” when she said she had been raped in this case was what one would expect the witnesses to say, and was unlikely to have been given much, if any, weight by the jury. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Shampgreen1 sentence1988State v. Parker, 417 N.W.2d 643, 647 (Minn.1988). 2 The court of appeals based its conclusion that the lack of a cautionary instruction was prejudicial on the fact that “it cannot be said with certainty that the jury did not base its finding of guilt partially on the 1978 or 1979 incident.” State v. Shamp, 422 N.W.2d 736, 739 (Minn.App.1988). 3 In *231 fact, there was not just one incident in 1978 or one incident in 1979. | 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. Fader
green
1 sentence1992Id. 1 While we agree that the evidence was erroneously admitted, we disagree with the court of appeals’ conclusion that the error was prejudicial error in this case. | 1 | 1992–1992 |
State v. Larson
green
2 sentences1990Id. at 598-99 . 1990Id. at 598-99 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
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.