 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Cuypers v. State, A05-644,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Postconviction court's denial of relief without evidentiary hearing was not improper where record clearly and conclusively supported denial of relief. In part, appellant had a fair trial in a fair tribunal before impartial judge, Minnesota had not approved diminished capacity doctrine, and appellant was not denied effective assistance of counsel.
|
|||||
| Deegan v. State, A05-24,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Minn. Stat. § 590.05 as amended in 2003 was unconstitutional because the petitioner's right to the assistance of counsel under Minn. Const. art. I, § 6 extended to one review of his criminal conviction, whether by direct appeal or a first review by postconviction proceeding.
|
|||||
| In re Day, A04-1046,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Attorney was disbarred from the practice of law in Minnesota because the attorney demonstrated a disregard for the ethical practice of law by failing to comply with the orders of the court, repeatedly engaging in the unauthorized practice of law, and failing to cooperate with the investigation concerning alleged misconduct.
|
|||||
| In re Day, A04-1046,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where a suspended attorney continued to accept clients, refused to return files, misappropriated funds, and refused to cooperate with investigations, in violation of Minn. Stat. § 481.02, Minn. R. Prof. Conduct 1.4, 1.16, 5.5, 8.1, 8.4 and Minn. R. Law. Prof. Resp. 25, a disbarment was ordered.
|
|||||
| White v. State, A05-1169,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, March 23, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because it appeared that the grand jury was selected in conformance with established law, petitioner had not established that his trial counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness due to his counsel's failure to challenge the indictment on that basis; most of petitioner's other claims were barred by the Knaffla rule.
|
|||||
| Bradley v. First Nat'l Bank, A05-634,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Summary judgment was properly awarded to a bank in appellant's action for violation of Minnesota Uniform Fiduciary Act where the Minnesota Uniform Commercial Code instead applied to appellant's claims against the bank for honoring checks fraudulently written by a fiduciary. Appellant failed to make cognizable claim under Minn. Stat. § 336.3-307(b).
|
|||||
| In re Class A License Application of N. Metro Harness, Inc., A05-471,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Racing commission acted with diligence and retained jurisdiction in quasi-judicial proceeding and had inherent authority to sua sponte move to reconsider its denial of Class A racetrack license to racetrack developer as time for appeal had not expired and no statute or rule proscribed such action and an opposition group was not denied due process.
|
|||||
| State v. J.Y.M., A05-1096,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, March 28, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Order sealing non-court records related to an individual's prosecution for felony theft upon his successful completion of a diversion program was reversed as Minn. Stat. § 609A.02, subd. 3 did not support expungement where there had been admission of guilt and the individual entered a guilty plea before being accepted into the diversion program.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
