Supreme Court of Minnesota· 4/17/1992

State v. Hummel

Citations

483 N.W.2d 68
1992 Minn. LEXIS 107
1992 WL 75679

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

finding that a third party who possesses common authority over the premises may consent to a search
affirming the denial of in camera review when the defendant provided “no theories on how the [confidential] file could be related to the defense or why the file was reasonably likely to contain information related to the case”
a defendant is not entitled to in camera review of a murder victim’s psychiatric records absent a showing of how the file could likely be related to the defense
a defendant is not entitled to in camera review of a murder victim's psychiatric records absent a showing of how the file could likely be related to the defense
petitioner was not entitled to in camera review of confidential medical records when he made no showing that file was relevant to defense theory
defendant’s request for in camera review of mental health records was properly denied by district court due to defendant’s failure to show how records could be rele vant to his defense

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Gardebring

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

39 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

26 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

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.