Legal Opinion
Back v. State
Supreme Court of Minnesota
Decided September 27, 2017No. A15-1637PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
STRAS, Justice.
This case requires us to determine whether Danna Rochelle Back may file a petition for an order declaring her eligible for compensation under Minnesota’s Imprisonment and Exoneration Remedies Act, Minn. Stat. §§.590.11, 611.362-.868 (2016) (the “exoneration-compensation statute”). The case raises three purely legal questions. First, was Back “exonerated” under Minn. Stat. § 590.11, subd. l(l)(i), when we reversed her conviction of second-degree manslaughter after . concluding that she could not have been negligently culpable as a matter of law? Second, if our decision…
2Cases cited28 opinions
- City of Cleburne v. Cleburne Living Center, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1985
- Federal Communications Commission v. Beach Communications, Inc.Supreme Court of the United States · 1993
- City of New Orleans v. DukesSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- Zablocki v. RedhailSupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Lehnhausen v. Lake Shore Auto Parts Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
23 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. HollowaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2018
- Buhl v. StateCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2019
- Minn. Sands, LLC v. Cnty. of WinonaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2018
- Minnesota Voters Alliance v. Keith EllisonCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2026