Legal Opinion

State v. Boyd

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 1, 1983No. C2-82-1624PublishedCited by 25 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is a pretrial appeal by the state, pursuant to Minn.R.Crim. 29.03, from an order of the district court granting a defense motion to limit (and in effect suppress) the testimony of an expert witness for the state in its prosecution of defendant for criminal sexual conduct in the third degree, Minn.Stat. § 609.344(b) (1982). 1 The testimony, which the state wants to use to prove that defendant sexually penetrated the victim, is that the complainant has given birth to a child after the alleged act of penetration and that blood test results indicate that defendant is…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. CarlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  2. Hepfel v. BashawSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  3. State v. MasonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1922
  4. State, on Behalf of Ortloff v. HansonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1979
  5. State on Behalf of Kremin v. GrahamSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982

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

3Cited by25 opinions

  1. State v. Joon Kyu KimSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
  2. State v. SchwartzSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  3. People v. HarboldAppellate Court of Illinois · 1984
  4. Ex Parte PerrySupreme Court of Alabama · 1991
  5. United States v. Matthew Sylvester Two Bulls, A/K/A Matthew Sylvester Two Bulls, Jr.Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1990

20 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