Skip to main content

State v. Pierson

Citations

  • 530 N.W.2d 784
  • 1995 Minn. LEXIS 396
  • 1995 WL 259314

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that it is unnecessary “[ujnder Minnesota law ... to have predicted with certainty that a companion would intentionally murder the victim”
  • stating that “presence, companionship, and conduct before and after the offense are circumstances from which a person’s participation in the criminal intent may be inferred”
  • stating that “evidence indicating [that] the victim was murdered during the commission of an aggravated robbery is a significant factor [that] the jury may consider in determining foreseeability”
  • “[T]he record supports a finding that the murder was committed in furtherance of the robbery, 11 particularly because it shows that the first shot was fired just after [the victim] stated ‘get off me’ and resisted the robbery effort.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Keith

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

10 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.