State v. Rhodes
Supreme Court of Minnesota
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
- Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- Michel v. LouisianaSupreme Court of the United States · 1956
- Affronti v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1955
- State v. GrillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- State v. WebbSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
27 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by79 opinions
- Opsahl v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. BlomSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. Al-NaseerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
- Cannon v. MullinCourt of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit · 2004
- State v. VangSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
74 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.