 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Bruestle v. State, A05-1707,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Postconviction court did not abuse discretion in holding that evidentiary hearing was not required when appellant, who pled guilty to first-degree premeditated murder, Minn. Stat. §§ 609.185(a)(1), 609.11 (2004), could not show that his trial counsel's decision not to pursue insanity defense or an incompetency argument was ineffective assistance.
|
|||||
| Fin Ag, Inc. v. Hufnagle, Inc., A04-2176,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because of the inclusion of the clause "created by the seller" in 7 U.S.C.S. § 1631, there was no protection for a buyer where a security interest was not created by persons fronting corn for sale; moreover, even if the corn had been transformed to inventory, there was no protection under Minn. Stat. § 336.9-307 for such a transaction either.
|
|||||
| State v. Dettman, A04-975,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's Sixth Amendment right to a jury trial was violated when judicially determined aggravating factors were used to enhance his conviction; defendant was required to expressly, knowingly, and voluntarily waive his right to a jury determination of facts before statements given at a plea hearing could have been used to enhance the sentence.
|
|||||
| State v. Green, A05-336,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court affirmed defendant's convictions of first and second-degree murder and attempted murder because, in part, any error in the jury instructions was harmless and there was sufficient evidence to prove that at least an attempted aggravated robbery had been committed and that he committed first-degree intentional felony murder.
|
|||||
| State v. Heden, A05-1386,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was not subject to custodial interrogation, Fifth Amendment, because he was neither under arrest nor informed that he was the prime suspect, he was unrestrained, although there were other officers in the house, only one was in the room during the interrogation, and at no point did any officer draw a weapon in defendant's presence.
|
|||||
| State v. Scanlon, A05-586,
SUPREME COURT OF MINNESOTA, August 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's statements were not obtained in violation of his right to counsel where three months passed between interrogation during which he demanded counsel and a subsequent interview, during which he was not in custody; defendant was sufficiently "out of custody" for his Edwards invocation to be nullified.
|
|||||
| In re L.M., A06-0044,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, August 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Denial of the State's motion to designate the juvenile as an adult for charges was inappropriate pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 260B.125 because the burden should not have been shifted to the State to rebut a presumption of certification with evidence that he was not amenable to treatment that no adequate programming existed in the juvenile system.
|
|||||
| Johanns v. Minn. Mobile Storage, Inc., A05-1578,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, August 15, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: An agreement between a self-storage facility and occupants to limit damages to $ 5,000 was consistent with Minn. Stat. § 514.975 of the Minnesota Liens on Personal Property in Self-Service Storage Act because it did not release or exempt the facility from all liability, but simply partially exempted its potential exposure to $ 5,000.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
