229, 234 (1939); State v. Weyerhauser, 72 Minn. 519, 519-20, 75 N.W. 718, 718 (1898). A. A Supreme Court decision is on point when it resolves the federal question presented for our review. Two factors guide our analysis in determining whether a decision is on point. The most important consideration is whether the Supreme Court decision resolved the same, disputed question of federal law. See Meadowbrook Manor, 258 Minn. at 272, 104 N.W.2d at 545 (concluding that notice by newspaper publication of a special assessment on real property did not comply with the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment based on three Supreme Court decisions, even though this court had previously upheld notice by publication in similar circumstances); Glover, 215 Minn. at 535-38, 10 N.W.2d at 482-83 (<HOLDING>). That is because the Supreme Court has the
holding that the sixth and fourteenth amendments imply the right to selfrepresentation holding that a prisoners right to hie grievances is constitutionally protected under the first and fourteenth amendments holding that the confrontation clause is applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment holding that the fifth amendments protection against selfincrimination is applicable to the states through the fourteenth amendment holding that peaceful picketing is protected through the first and fourteenth amendments on the basis of five supreme court decisions examining the question