Supreme Court of Minnesota· 5/20/2010

State v. Jenkins

Citations

782 N.W.2d 211
2010 Minn. LEXIS 244
2010 WL 1994651

How courts have described this case

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

concluding in context of plain- error review that “the district court did not abuse its discretion or commit any error when it granted the State’s motion to exclude the evidence on relevance grounds”
stating that the defendant’s evidence “at most established that [the alleged alternative perpetrator] 6 was present [at the crime scene] at some point on the night of the charged crime” but did not connect him to the crime
stating that “the [offer of proof] at most established that [the alleged alternative perpetrator] was present [at the crime scene] at some point on the night of the charged crime” but not that he “was present at the . . . time of the crime”
describing the elements of first-degree premeditated murder

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Page

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

50 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.