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.
6 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 1972–2016 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. Billstromgreen2 sentences2006The court first announced a necessity requirement of admissibility under the identity exception in State v. Billstrom: “Evidence of other crimes is admissible only if the trial court finds the direct or circumstantial evidence of defendant’s identity is otherwise weak or inadequate, and that it is necessary to support the state’s burden of proof.” 276 Minn. at 178-79 , 149 N.W.2d at 284 (footnote omitted). 2006The court first announced a necessity requirement of admissibility under the identity exception in State v. Billstrom: “Evidence of other crimes is admissible only if the trial court finds the direct or circumstantial evidence of defendant’s identity is otherwise weak or inadequate, and that it is necessary to support the state’s burden of proof.” 276 Minn. at 178-79 , 149 N.W.2d at 284 (footnote omitted). | 2 | 5 |
State v. Cogshellgreen1 sentence2016See State v. Cogshell, 538 N.W.2d 120, 124 (Minn. 1995). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Stewartgreen2 sentences2005State v. Asfeld, 662 N.W.2d 534, 542 (Minn.2003); see also State v. Stewart, 643 N.W.2d at 296 . [4] In State v. Billstrom, 276 Minn. 174 , 149 N.W.2d 281 (1967), we added a necessity requirement where the Spreigl evidence is offered under the identity exception. 2005State v. Asfeld, 662 N.W.2d 534, 542 (Minn. 2003); see also State v. Stewart, 643 N.W.2d at 296 . 4 In State v. Billstrom, 276 Minn. 174 , 149 N.W.2d 281 (1967), we added a necessity requirement where the Spreigl evidence is offered under the identity exception. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Asfeldgreen2 sentences2005State v. Asfeld, 662 N.W.2d 534, 542 (Minn.2003); see also State v. Stewart, 643 N.W.2d at 296 . [4] In State v. Billstrom, 276 Minn. 174 , 149 N.W.2d 281 (1967), we added a necessity requirement where the Spreigl evidence is offered under the identity exception. 2005State v. Asfeld, 662 N.W.2d 534, 542 (Minn. 2003); see also State v. Stewart, 643 N.W.2d at 296 . 4 In State v. Billstrom, 276 Minn. 174 , 149 N.W.2d 281 (1967), we added a necessity requirement where the Spreigl evidence is offered under the identity exception. | 1 | 1 |
Ture v. Stategreen1 sentence1985State v. Billstrom, 276 Minn. 174 , 149 N.W.2d 281 (1967); See, Ture v. State, 353 N.W.2d 518 (Minn.1984). | 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.