State v. Winter
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
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
- State v. GrillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- State v. StrommenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- State v. RileySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. QuickSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- State v. FenneySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. DresselCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009
- State v. MartinCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2012
- State of Minnesota v. Chad Michael NowackiCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2016
- State of Minnesota v. Scott Michael PopaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2015