Legal Opinion

State v. Cao

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided September 16, 2010No. A08-1932PublishedCited by 12 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

MEYER, Justice.

Respondent Kasey Vo Cao was found guilty of third-and fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct, in violation of Minn.Stat. §§ 609.344, subd. 1(d), and 609.345, subd. 1(d) (2008). During the State’s closing argument, the prosecutor stated that Minnesota law did not require corroboration of the complainant’s testimony for the jury to find Cao guilty of criminal sexual conduct. The court of appeals held that this statement was prosecutorial misconduct in the form of plain error. We hold that the prosecutor did not commit plain error because the prosecutor’s statement did not…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. GrillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
  2. State v. RameySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
  3. State v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
  4. State v. WalshSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
  5. State v. DavisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by12 opinions

  1. State of Minnesota v. Amanda Lea PeltierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
  2. State v. VueSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
  3. State v. ParkerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
  4. State v. PatzoldCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2018
  5. Carlos Heard v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015

7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API