Legal Opinion

State v. Winter

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided September 2, 2003No. CX-02-1911PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STONEBURNER, Judge.

Appellant Richard Edward Winter challenges his conviction of second-degree criminal sexual conduct and fourth-degree criminal sexual conduct. Appellant argues that the district court’s admission into evidence of a taped police interview without redacting repeated references to polygraph testing constitutes plain error entitling him to a new trial. Because admission of repeated references to polygraph testing is plain error, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

FACTS

Appellant Richard Edward Winter was charged with second-degree and fourth-degree criminal sexual…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. GrillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
  2. State v. StrommenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
  3. State v. RileySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
  4. State v. QuickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  5. State v. FenneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. DresselCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
  2. State v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2012
  3. State of Minnesota v. Chad Michael NowackiCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
  4. State of Minnesota v. Scott Michael PopaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API