State v. Barsness
Can I rely on this case?
Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.
(as of 9/30/2026)
Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 2005, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.
Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Skapyak (Minn. Ct. App. 2005)
- State v. Jones (Minn. Ct. App. 1994)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
ORDER
WHEREAS, the trial court ruled that evidence of the defendant’s IQ is admissible with respect to determining intent as a fact issue;
WHEREAS, the court of appeals reversed the trial court’s ruling;
WHEREAS, in a pretrial appeal in a criminal case the trial court's determination will be reversed only if the state demonstrates both that the trial court erred in its judgment and, that unless reversed, the error will have a critical impact on the outcome of the trial. State v. Joon Kyu Kim, 398 N.W.2d 544 (Minn. 1987); and
WHEREAS, this court finds that the appellant has not established that the trial court’s order will have a critical impact on the outcome of the trial;
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the decision of the court of appeals be, and the same is, reversed and the matter is remanded for immediate trial.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.