Supreme Court of Minnesota· 11/8/1968
State v. Armstrong
Citations
- 162 N.W.2d 357
- 282 Minn. 39
- 1968 Minn. LEXIS 924
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding the circumstances, in which a known prostitute was present in an area rife with solicitation of prostitution and entered the car of a stranger without a plausible account of her actions, supported the defendant’s conviction for prostitution
- holding the circumstances, in which a known prostitute was present in an area rife with solicitation of prostitution and entered the car of a stranger without a plausible account of her actions, supported the defendant's conviction for prostitution
- loitering with intent to solicit prostitution
- loiter to solicit deviate sexual intercourse
- loitering with intent to solicit prostitution
- loiter to solicit deviate sexual intercourse
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Peterson
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
18 cases in this archive cite this case.
- City of Chicago v. MoralesIllinois Supreme Court· 1997-10-17· cited 94×
- People v. Superior CourtCalifornia Supreme Court· 1988-08-22· cited 76×
- Wyche v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1993-03-25· cited 59×
- City of Baton Rouge v. RossSupreme Court of Louisiana· 1995-04-28· cited 46×
- People v. MasonSupreme Court of Colorado· 1982-03-08· cited 39×
- Ford v. United StatesDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1985-09-23· cited 32×
- State ex rel. Juvenile Department of Multnomah County v. D.Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1976-12-27· cited 26×
- State v. BlossHawaii Supreme Court· 1980-06-17· cited 25×
- United States v. Nina L. KnoxEighth Circuit· 1989-11-03· cited 18×
- State Ex Rel. Williams v. City Court of TucsonCourt of Appeals of Arizona· 1974-04-09· cited 17×
- STATE Ex Rel MACOMB COUNTY PROSECUTING ATTORNEY v. MESKMichigan Court of Appeals· 1983-02-09· cited 13×
- Matter of D.Court of Appeals of Oregon· 1976-12-27· cited 11×
- State v. LeeSupreme Court of Iowa· 1982-01-20· cited 11×
- State v. OanesCourt of Appeals of Minnesota· 1996-02-06· cited 10×
- State v. RaySupreme Court of Minnesota· 1971-12-30· cited 8×
- State v. BennettSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1977-10-07· cited 7×
- City of Cleveland v. HowardCity of Cleveland Municipal Court· 1987-11-23· cited 6×
- State v. DugganSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1971-11-19· cited 1×
Cites
14 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Screws v. United StatesSupreme Court· 1945-05-07· cited 2,023×
- Hygrade Provision Co. v. ShermanSupreme Court· 1925-01-05· cited 210×
- Omaechevarria v. IdahoSupreme Court· 1918-03-18· cited 193×
- In Re CreglerCalifornia Supreme Court· 1961-07-20· cited 170×
- Hygrade Provision Co., Inc. v. Sherman, Atty. Gen. Of New York Lewis & Fox Co. v. Same. Satz v. SameSupreme Court· 1925-01-05· cited 154×
- City of Seattle v. DrewWashington Supreme Court· 1967-02-02· cited 124×
- Johnson v. FloridaSupreme Court· 1968-06-17· cited 57×
- State v. GulbrandsenSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1953-03-13· cited 33×
- Hicks v. District of ColumbiaSupreme Court· 1966-02-28· cited 28×
- World Airways, Inc. v. Pan American World Airways, Inc.Supreme Court· 1968-06-03· cited 28×
- Meyer v. Travelers InsuranceSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1915-07-02· cited 17×
- Garboctowski v. StateSupreme Court of Delaware· 1923-10-23· cited 14×
- Soles v. City of VidaliaCourt of Appeals of Georgia· 1955-10-11· cited 13×
- State v. MillerSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1958-07-03· cited 7×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.