 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| State v. Lentz, A06-723,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was convicted of four counts of contributing to the delinquency of a minor under Minn. Stat. § 260B.425, subd. 1(a), the jury was properly instructed that a person under 18 years of age who consumed alcohol was a juvenile petty offender. The instruction permissibly summarized the law applicable to the case at hand.
|
|||||
| State v. Schmalenberg, A06-1160,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because the jury found the corroborated testimony of a paid informant to be credible, given the deference afforded to the jury's credibility determinations and viewing facts in the light most favorable to verdict, the evidence was ruled sufficient by the appellate court to support defendant's conviction of a third-degree controlled-substance crime.
|
|||||
| State v. Schwender, A06-854,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Evidence was sufficient to convict defendant of first-degree possession of methamphetamine with intent to sell under Minn. Stat. § 152.021 as defendant was discovered with methamphetamine and a scale in his possession at the outset of the search of his motel room, and people were seen coming and going from his room for short visits.
|
|||||
| State v. Swan, A06-644,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a terroristic threats case, defendant's prior assault convictions were properly admitted under Minn. R. Evid. 609 as credibility was a central issue; nothing precluded defendant from explaining the circumstances of the convictions; and the convictions had significant impeachment value to assist the jury in seeing defendant as a "whole person."
|
|||||
| State v. Turner, A06-822,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where defendant was charged with DWI, the district court did not err by excluding expert testimony concerning his IQ; defendant did not challenge the finding that he was competent to stand trial. Testimony concerning the 911 call that led to defendant's arrest was not admitted for the truth of the matter asserted under Minn. R. Evid. 801(c).
|
|||||
| State v. Velazquez, A06-1228,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because record was incomplete, it was not clear whether district court abused its discretion under Minn. Stat. § 518B.01, subd. 6(a), in issuing no-contact order preventing appellant from having contact with his wife and child, but provision permitted no-contact order to be issued and, as so limited, order did not violate due process standards.
|
|||||
| Sullivan v. Am. Family Mut. Ins. Co., A06-1285,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In the insureds' suit to determine their insurer's defense obligations in relation to an underlying lawsuit brought by a neighboring property owner against the insureds, summary judgment in favor of the insurer was proper as the insurer was not obligated to indemnify or pay damages until the insureds' liability for the damage had been established.
|
|||||
| Westside Equip. Installers, Inc. v. North of Sixty Flying, Inc., A06-1618,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because appellant purchasers failed to produce evidence showing that additional work on gas pumps provided by the installer was made necessary because of any fault on behalf of the installer, the district court did not err by granting summary judgment for the installer on the breach of contract claims.
|
|||||
| Wieneke v. United Prairie Bank, A06-1836,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MINNESOTA, July 24, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court did not err in finding that a bank did not reject a tender of payment for farmers' consolidated loan because there was no evidence that the bank had any direction or authority from the farmers to apply all of the proceeds of certain checks only to the consolidated loan.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
