Legal Opinion

State v. Rhodes

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 20, 2003No. C3-98-1839PublishedCited by 79 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

RUSSELL A. ANDERSON, Justice.

This case returns to us from our remand for postconviction proceedings following appellant Thomas Rhodes’ appeal from a judgment of conviction for first-degree murder. Rhodes argues that he is entitled to a reversal of his conviction because his conviction rests on insufficient evidence, or alternatively, that he is entitled to a new trial on the basis of ineffective assistance of trial counsel or newly discovered evidence. We affirm Rhodes’ conviction for first-degree murder and the postconviction court’s denial of a new trial.

We begin by restating the…

2Cases cited32 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Michel v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
  3. Affronti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
  4. State v. GrillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
  5. State v. WebbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989

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

3Cited by79 opinions

  1. Opsahl v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
  2. State v. BlomSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
  3. State v. Al-NaseerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  4. Cannon v. MullinCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
  5. State v. VangSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014

74 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