State v. Frisinger
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
SIMONETT, Justice.
In its decision the court of appeals granted the defendant a new trial because, in its view, the trial court committed plain error of a prejudicial nature in failing to give, sua sponte, cautionary instructions on the appropriate use by the jury of other-crime evidence admitted against defendant pursuant to Minn.R.Evid. 404(b). State v. Frisinger, 478 N.W.2d 538 (Minn.App.1991). We hold that the trial court did not commit plain error of a prejudicial nature. Accordingly, we reverse the decision of the court of appeals and reinstate the judgment of conviction of the…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- Crane v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1986
- State v. SpreiglSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965
- State v. FilippiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
- State v. ForsmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1977
- State v. CrockerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1987
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by43 opinions
- State v. BolteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- State v. BlomSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. ProfitSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- State v. BauerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
- State v. WermerskirchenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1993
38 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.