State v. Jensen

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the principles underlying retrograde extrapolation were not emerging or novel and that expert testimony on the subject was admissible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

11 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Commonwealth v. Senior
  Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 2001-03-13· cited 37×
• State v. Wolf
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2000-01-27· cited 27×
• People v. Beck
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 2018-02-05· cited 11×
• Ellingson v. Commissioner of Public Safety
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2011-06-27· cited 11×
• State v. Dixon
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2012-11-05· cited 8×
• State v. Morales-Mulato
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2008-02-19· cited 7×
• In Re the Welfare of K.A.S.
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1998-10-06· cited 6×
• State v. Wolf
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1999-04-20· cited 5×
• State v. Edstrom
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2010-12-21· cited 4×
• Hotchkiss v. Commissioner of Public Safety
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1996-08-27· cited 3×
• State of Tennessee v. Tamela Scott
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 2008-09-17

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Lothenbach
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1980-08-29· cited 192×
• State v. Dille
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1977-08-19· cited 83×
• Cuellar v. Hout
  Appellate Court of Illinois· 1988-04-15· cited 27×
• Commonwealth v. Britcher
  Supreme Court of Pennsylvania· 1989-08-10· cited 22×
• Block v. Target Stores, Inc.
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1990-08-07· cited 17×
• May v. Strecker
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1990-04-03· cited 8×