Supreme Court Opinions


Appellate Courts will begin transmitting all notices, orders, and opinions electronically.

Beginning no later than July 1, 2011, the appellate courts will send notices, orders, opinions and correspondence related to pending cases to attorneys in those cases by e-mail rather than postal mail.  All attorneys with pending appellate cases who have not already registered an e-mail address should do so immediately.  Unrepresented parties with pending appellate cases may also participate in this e-notification system by registering an e-mail address.  Please go to the Clerk of Appellate Courts page for instructions how to register your e-mail address.


Please visit the Minnesota State Law Library's Appellate Opinions Archive for previously published Supreme Court Opinions.

NOTE: If you are having trouble accessing the tabs on your mobile device, you may view all Opinions and Orders on a single page.


FILED Wednesday, May 31, 2023


Opinion SetsOpinion sets contain all opinions and orders. The sets are compressed into files that must be unpacked before opening them.

No Opinion Sets Available


FILED Tuesday, May 16, 2023

(Petitioner indicated in Italic Type)

(Issues are as Presented in the Petition for Review)


1.          Lisa Stone, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated vs. Invitation Homes, Inc., et al., THR Property Management, L.P., et al. – A22-0928

Issue Granted:  Does Minnesota law already recognize—or should it recognize—the juridical-link doctrine in the context of class-action standing?

2.          Robert John Kaiser vs. State of Minnesota – A22-0749

Issues Granted:  1) Did the court of appeals err when it held the Larrison test for false testimony applies to unrecanted medical expert opinion testimony?  2) Did the postconviction court abuse its discretion when it granted Kaiser a new trial for ineffective assistance of counsel based almost exclusively on the postconviction courts disagreement with trial counsel’s investigation and trial strategy?

3.          State of Minnesota vs. Deshawn Kejuan Woolridge Carter ­– A22-0164

Issue Granted:  Should the district court assign a custody-status point to a defendant's criminal-history score if the defendant was on probation for a prior felony offense at the time of the charged offense where the defendant received a stay of adjudication and was not actually convicted of the prior offense?


4.          State of Minnesota vs. Earley Romero Blevins – A22-0432

Issues:  1) Under Minnesota law, does an individual who has been threatened with deadly force have a duty to retreat before resorting to non-physical force?  2) If there is a duty to retreat before resorting to non-physical force, at what point in a conflict is the duty triggered?

             Stayed Pending Final Disposition in State v. Lampkin, A20-0361.

5.          State of Minnesota vs. Richard James Graf – A22-0269

Issue:  Did the state prove venue beyond a reasonable doubt where the only evidence it presented on that element was a generic street address and the identity of the investigating police department?

             Stayed Pending Final Disposition in State v. Johnson, A21-1360.

Granted – Filed May 1, 2023

6.          In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: G.A.H. and S.T., Parents, In the Matter of the Welfare of the Children of: S.T. and A.D.,
             Parents – A22-1065, A22-1066

Issues Granted:  Whether the trial court violated Appellant’s due process rights, thus prejudicing Appellant:  i) whether Appellant’s due process rights were violated by the court’s refusal to continue the trial so as to allow Appellant to testify;  ii) whether Appellant’s due process rights were violated by the court’s refusal to allow appellant’s trial counsel to cross-examine the Guardian Ad Litem or call other witnesses on behalf of Appellant; and  iii) whether these violations of Appellant’s due process rights were prejudicial to Appellant.  In addition, the court directed the parties to specifically address, in their briefs, the issue of whether the alleged due process violations identified in the issues above are subject to harmless error review.


  7.    Marcel Moses vs. State of Minnesota – A22-0452
  8.    Minnesota Automobile Dealers Association vs. Minnesota Pollution Control Agency – A22-0796
  9.    Christopher Abdul-Haqq, et al. vs. David LaLiberte, et al. – A22-0738 
10.    Kallys Albert, Sr. vs. Chon Xiong, Jared J. Timmer (Progressive Claims Generalist), John Does – A23-0053
11.    State of Minnesota vs. Manuel Braulio Barrios – A22-0605 
12.    State of Minnesota vs. Shane Aaron Stroschein – A21-0976 
13.    State of Minnesota vs. Bryant Jerome Stephenson – A22-0242 
14.    Mark Scott Hendrickson vs. Office of the Minnesota Appellate Public Defender – A23-0140 (Petition for accelerated review)
15.    State of Minnesota vs. Merwin Andrew Coleman – A22-0999
16.    Joseph Anthony Favors vs. Montgomery Wards – A23-0105
17.    In the Matter of the Welfare of:  D.L.N., Child – A22-1021
18.    State of Minnesota vs. Russell Floyd Lindquist – A22-0850
19.    State of Minnesota vs. Justin Lee Gomez – A22-0371
20.    State of Minnesota vs. Mal Pauliet Tharjiath – A21-1271
21.    State of Minnesota vs. Derrick Sserwanja – A22-0392
22.    State of Minnesota vs. Bobby Dawkins, Jr. – A22-0241
23.    State of Minnesota vs. Anthony Barrett Graham – A21-0941
24.    Karen K. Osowski vs. Edie Harer – A22-1105
25.    Kimberly Anne Bachman vs. Commissioner of Public Safety – A22-1039