Legal Opinion
State v. Stallings
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided December 20, 1991No. C6-91-127PublishedCited by 14 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
COYNE, Justice.
The issue on this criminal appeal is whether, as a divided court of appeals held, the trial court prejudicially erred in denying a defense request to admit hearsay evidence under Minn.R.Evid. 804(b)(5), the second of the two so-called “catchall” exceptions to the hearsay rule [the other being R. 803(24)]. State v. Stallings, 474 N.W.2d 645 (Minn.App.1991). We hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in ruling as it did, and we reverse the court of appeals and reinstate the judgment of conviction.
Defendant’s convictions of assault in the second and third degrees…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Ohio v. RobertsSupreme Court of the United States · 1980
- California v. GreenSupreme Court of the United States · 1970
- State v. DanielsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- United States v. Robert J. SnyderCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 1989
- State v. RenierSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- State v. KeetonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- State v. Moua HerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
- State v. ByersSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. MartinezSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- State v. AubidSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.