Legal Opinion

State v. McDaniel

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided July 11, 1995No. C6-94-1728PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KLAPHAKE, Judge.

Appellant Nathaniel McDaniel argues that he is entitled to a new trial because (1) the evidence is insufficient to support a finding of “great bodily harm” which is required for first-degree assault, and (2) the prosecutor’s remarks during appellant’s cross-examination and closing argument constituted prosecuto-rial misconduct. We affirm.

FACTS

Appellant was convicted of first-degree assault for stabbing Joseph Keller with a knife on October 24, 1993. Appellant and his two witnesses testified that appellant was surrounded by several people and was struck himself before he…

2Cases cited13 opinions

  1. State v. WebbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  2. State v. WahlbergSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  3. State v. CaronSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1974
  4. State v. TureSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  5. State v. NorgaardSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1965

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

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. PilotSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
  2. State v. SmithCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000
  3. State v. GrigsbyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
  4. State v. HarlinCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
  5. Abdullahi Aden Ibrahim v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2024

1 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