Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1/2/1987
State v. Joon Kyu Kim
Citations
- 398 N.W.2d 544
- 1987 Minn. LEXIS 688
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- clarifying that the Webber critical-impact requirement does not require the State to show that the lack of the suppressed evidence “completely destroys” its case; it is enough that the lack “significantly reduces the likelihood of a successful prosecution”
- expert may testify tests do not exclude defendant and are consistent with defendant being the source
- trial court correct in refusing to permit expert to testify that 96.4% of males in twin cities population, but not Kim, could be excluded on basis of blood and electrophoresis testing
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Wahl, Kelley
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
135 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- State v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1989-11-03· cited 141×
- State v. ZanterSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1995-08-04· cited 111×
- Commonwealth v. RodgersSuperior Court of Pennsylvania· 1992-02-26· cited 98×
- Armstead v. StateCourt of Appeals of Maryland· 1996-03-20· cited 95×
- United States v. PorterDistrict of Columbia Court of Appeals· 1992-12-22· cited 78×
- State v. ScottSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1998-08-27· cited 76×
- Joon Kyu Kim v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1989-01-13· cited 72×
- Ex Parte PerrySupreme Court of Alabama· 1991-04-19· cited 69×
- United States v. Matthew Sylvester Two Bulls, A/K/A Matthew Sylvester Two Bulls, Jr.Eighth Circuit· 1990-10-31· cited 58×
- People v. AxellCalifornia Court of Appeal· 1991-10-29· cited 52×
- State v. UnderdahlSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2009-04-30· cited 50×
- State v. BarrettSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2005-04-21· cited 49×
- State v. BloomSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1994-04-29· cited 47×
- State v. ObetaSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2011-03-24· cited 45×
- State v. VarnadoSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1998-08-06· cited 44×
- State v. HannonSupreme Court of Minnesota· 2005-08-18· cited 43×
- State v. FenneySupreme Court of Minnesota· 1989-11-03· cited 40×
- State v. PennellSuperior Court of Delaware· 1989-11-06· cited 40×
- State v. EdrozoSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1998-05-14· cited 36×
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1993-03-19· cited 36×
Cites
33 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Smith v. AllwrightSupreme Court· 1944-06-12· cited 875×
- State v. WebberSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1977-12-05· cited 143×
- State v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1978-05-26· cited 106×
- State v. KvamSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1983-07-22· cited 91×
- State v. WashingtonSupreme Court of Kansas· 1981-01-17· cited 85×
- Cochran v. KeetonSupreme Court of Alabama· 1971-09-09· cited 57×
- State v. SiegfriedSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1978-12-08· cited 56×
- State v. VohnoutkaSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1980-05-09· cited 56×
- Davis v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals· 1985-03-28· cited 53×
- State v. ClaytonUtah Supreme Court· 1982-05-06· cited 50×
- State v. AguirreSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1980-07-03· cited 32×
- State v. BoydSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1983-04-01· cited 29×
- State v. LudtkeSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1981-06-02· cited 28×
- State v. RodewaldSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1985-11-08· cited 26×
- State v. PatricelliSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1982-09-14· cited 20×
- State v. MarhounSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1982-08-24· cited 19×
- State on Behalf of Kremin v. GrahamSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1982-05-07· cited 18×
- State v. FrazierSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1982-04-09· cited 16×
- State v. DineenSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1980-08-12· cited 16×
- State v. GonzalesSupreme Court of Minnesota· 1982-01-18· cited 14×
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.