§ 152.09

Minnesota Statutes

Source: 2025 Minnesota Statutes. For the official text, see revisor.mn.gov.

Citing Cases (60)

Minnesota Supreme Court

State v. Arkell · 2003 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. McIntosh · 2002 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

In Re Welfare of C.R.M. · 2000 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Soto · 1997 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Gould · 1997 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Carithers · 1992 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Smith · 1991 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Wiley · 1985 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Nolan · 1984 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Seifert · 1984 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Hunner · 1983 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Johnson · 1982 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Kemp · 1981 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Strong · 1980 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Minnesota Court of Appeals

State v. Ortega · 2008 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Pinkerton · 2001 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Olson · 1991 1 citation

Olson argues the statute under which he was convicted, Minn. Stat. § 152.022, subd. 2(4), is unconstitutionally vague because it omits a definition of possession. The statute previously contained such a definition, until it was repealed in 1989. See Minn. Stat. § 152.09, subd. 1(2) (1988). However, the pre-repeal language remains the recommended language in the jury instruction guides. See 10A Minnesota Practice, CRIM.JIG 20.06 (1990).

State v. Hanson · 1991 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Smith · 1991 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Lindsey · 1990 1 citation

This appeal is from a judgment of conviction for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute. Minn. Stat. §§ 152.09, subd. 1(1), 152.15, subd. 1(2) (1988). Following an adverse ruling on his motion to suppress evidence seized pursuant to a search warrant, appellant Mose Lindsey waived a jury trial and was found guilty on stipulated facts. Upon examination of law governing telephonic application for a warrant, we reverse.

State v. Martinson · 1990 3 citations

+ 3 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Parson · 1990 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Smith · 1989 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Reese · 1989 4 citations

+ 4 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Moore · 1988 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

Gernes v. Commissioner of Public Safety · 1988 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Schuette · 1988 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Rothstein · 1988 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Ramon v. State · 1987 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Ailport · 1987 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Ailport · 1987 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Marshall · 1987 2 citations

+ 2 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Gabbert · 1987 2 citations

The warrant was signed and executed that same day. Among the items discovered and seized were approximately 40 marijuana plants and various drug paraphernalia. Gabbert was arrested and charged with possession of a controlled substance in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 152.09, subd. 1(2); 152.15, subd. 2(2) (1986), and manufacture or possession with intent to distribute a controlled substance in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 152.09, subd. 1(1); 152.15, subd. 1(2) (1986).

State v. Jenkins · 1987 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Matter of the Welfare of R.D.W. · 1987 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Nace · 1987 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Schnorr · 1987 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

Ramon v. Minnesota · 1987 1 citation

Respondent Manuel Ramon was charged and convicted of possession of a controlled substance (marijuana) in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 152.09, subd. 1(2), 152.15, subd. 2(2), and misdemeanor theft in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.52, subds. 2(1), 3(5). Following a petition for post-conviction relief, the post-conviction court vacated Ramon’s convictions because the use of convictions over ten years old for impeachment at trial without prior notice or hearing amounted to plain error. We reverse and remand for a determination of issues not decided by the post-conviction court.

State v. Lund · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Starnes · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Hernandez · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Lewis · 1986 8 citations

+ 8 more citations in this opinion.

State v. Balsimo · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Smith · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Munoz · 1986 2 citations

Appellant was convicted under Minn. Stat. § 152.09, which states:

State v. Vogel · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Albino · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Kipp · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Lonergan · 1986 1 citation

+ 1 more citation in this opinion.

State v. Cusick · 1985 2 citations

OPINION LANSING, Judge. Defendant, convicted by a jury of unlawful possession of cocaine in violation of Minn. Stat. §§ 152.09, subd. 1(2); 152.02, subd. 3(1)(d); and 152.15, subd. 1(1) (1984), appeals from the judgment and from an order denying his post-trial motions. He contends the evidence was insufficient to establish knowing possession of cocaine. We reverse.