State v. Forcier
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
AMDAHL, Chief Justice.
The main questions in this criminal appeal are whether any error in admitting defendant’s exculpatory statement during the state’s case-in-chief is subject to harmless error analysis and, if so, whether the error was indeed harmless. Answering both questions affirmatively, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals and reinstate the judgment of conviction.
Defendant, age 21, and the complainant, age 23, are two young men who, during their adolescent years, were victims of sexual abuse by complainant’s father. Defendant, however, in addition to being a victim, was…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Edwards v. ArizonaSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
- Harris v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Richardson v. MarshSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Oregon v. MathiasonSupreme Court of the United States · 1977
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by27 opinions
- State v. RobinsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- State v. BuchananSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
- State v. ShoopSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
- State v. WalshSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
- State v. FergusonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
22 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.