State v. Carlson

4 Citing cases

  1. Carlson v. State

    A20-0697 (Minn. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2021)

    On March 14, 2016, this court affirmed appellants' convictions. See State v. Philip Lee Carlson, A15-0190 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn. May 31, 2016), and State v. Virginia Marie Carlson, A15-0179 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn.

  2. Carlson v. State

    A18-1162 (Minn. Ct. App. Aug. 5, 2019)

    The Carlsons appealed their convictions, arguing that (1) the evidence was insufficient to support their convictions; (2) the prosecutor engaged in misconduct; (3) the state violated Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194 (1963); (4) the state failed to disclose exculpatory evidence to the grand jury; (5) the district court erred in ruling that certain documents could not be used at trial; (6) the district court erred in admitting certain evidence; (7) the district court erred in instructing the jury regarding accomplice liability; (8) they did not adequately waive their rights to testify; and (9) public policy required reversal. State v. Carlson, No. A15-0190, 2016 WL 952465, at *3-9 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn. May 31, 2016); State v. Carlson, No. A15-0179, 2016 WL 952453, at *3-10 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn.

  3. State v. Carlson

    A15-1210 (Minn. Ct. App. Jul. 25, 2016)   Cited 1 times

    The plea agreement provided that if Carlson succeeded in his appeal of file 27-CR-11-29604, he would be permitted to withdraw his guilty plea in the present case. Because we affirmed that conviction in State v. Carlson, No. A15-0190 (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016), review denied (Minn. May 31, 2016), Carlson is not entitled to withdraw his plea on that basis.

  4. State v. Carlson

    A15-0179 (Minn. Ct. App. Mar. 14, 2016)   Cited 4 times

    We therefore address Philip Carlson's appeal separately. State v. Philip Carlson, No. A15-0190, slip op. (Minn. App. Mar. 14, 2016). DECISION