Legal Opinion

State v. Bell

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided July 27, 2006No. A04-1595PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

PAGE, Justice.

Appellant Ronald James Bell was convicted in Ramsey County District Court of first-degree burglary in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.582, subd. 1(c) (2004), and violation of a no-contact order under Minn. Stat. § 518B.01, subd. 22(b) (2004). Bell appealed his conviction to the court of appeals, claiming that the trial court erred when it permitted, under Minn.Stat. § 634.20 (2004), the introduction of evidence of two previous incidents in which Bell violated an order for protection (OFP) involving the same victim. The court of appeals affirmed. State v. Bell, 703 N.W.2d…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. BoyceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1969
  2. State v. McCoySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2004
  3. State v. NessSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
  4. In Re GlaxoSmithKline PlcSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
  5. State v. WilliamsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. LindseyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
  2. State v. WordCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008
  3. State v. FragaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
  4. In re the Welfare of J.H.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
  5. State v. O'MEARACourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2008

19 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