DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Ellingson, 167 N.W.2d 55.

79 citing documents.

  • State v. Hill 253 N.W.2d 378 Minn. 1977
    State v. Senske, supra; State v. Burch, 284 Minn. 300 , State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208
  • State v. Duncan 250 N.W.2d 189 Minn. 1977
  • State v. Duncan 250 N.W.2d 189 Minn. 1977
    The standard of review for determining sufficiency of the evidence for a jury verdict was stated by this court in State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208, 211 , : *32 “It will be noted that in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence we do not try the facts anew.
  • State v. Goblirsch 246 N.W.2d 12 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Goblirsch 246 N.W.2d 12 Minn. 1976
    State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208
  • State v. Houff 243 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Houff 243 N.W.2d 129 Minn. 1976
    State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208, 211 , 167 N. W. *7 2d 55, 57 (1969).
  • State v. Diamond 241 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1976
  • State v. Diamond 241 N.W.2d 95 Minn. 1976
    Viewing the evidence to support the jury’s conclusion in the light most favorable to its verdict of guilt, State v. Loss, 295 Minn. 271 , we are compelled to assume that the jury believed the state’s testimony and disbelieved that which contradicted it, State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208
  • State v. Loss 204 N.W.2d 404 Minn. 1973
  • State v. Loss 204 N.W.2d 404 Minn. 1973
    State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , State v. Daml, 282 Minn. 521
  • State v. Smith 203 N.W.2d 348 Minn. 1972
  • State v. Smith 203 N.W.2d 348 Minn. 1972
    We reiterate that our function in reviewing evidence “is not to try the facts anew but to determine from the record as a whole whether the evidence permits the inference required to justify a conviction.” State v. Crosby, 277 Minn. 22, 24 , State v. Carlson, 280 Minn. 77, 80 , State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208, 211
  • State v. Morgan 188 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Morgan 188 N.W.2d 917 Minn. 1971
    State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 .
  • State v. Roper 187 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Roper 187 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 1971
    State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 ; State v. Nelson, 285 Minn. 304 , 173 N. W. (2d) 349 ; State v. Doust, 285 Minn. 336 , 173 N. W. (2d) 337 ; State v. O’Donnell, 280 Minn. 213 , 158 N. W. (2d) 699 .
  • State v. Bergland 187 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Bergland 187 N.W.2d 622 Minn. 1971
    State v. Kline, 266 Minn. 372 , 124 N. W. (2d) 416 , certiorari denied, 376 U. S. 962 , 84 S. Ct. 1124 , 11 L. ed. (2d) 980; State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 .
  • State v. Lipscomb 183 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Lipscomb 183 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 1971
    State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 ; State v. Daml, 282 Minn. 521 , 162 N. W. (2d) 240 ; State v. Keezer, 274 Minn. 292 , 143 N. W. (2d) 627 ; State v. Dienger, 286 Minn. 436 , 176 N. W. (2d) 528 .
  • State v. Bishop 183 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 1971
  • State v. Bishop 183 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 1971
    See, also, State v. Clark, supra, and State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 .
  • State v. Stark 179 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 1970
  • State v. Stark 179 N.W.2d 597 Minn. 1970
    State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 ; State v. Bagley, 286 Minn. 180 , 175 N. W. (2d) 448 .
  • State v. Darrow 177 N.W.2d 778 Minn. 1970
  • State v. Darrow 177 N.W.2d 778 Minn. 1970
    In State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208, 211 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55, 57 , we said: “It will be noted that in reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence we do not try the facts anew.
  • State v. Gluff 172 N.W.2d 63 Minn. 1969
  • State v. Gluff 172 N.W.2d 63 Minn. 1969
    State v. Sutton, 272 Minn. 399 , 138 N. W. (2d) 46 ; State v. Ellingson, 283 Minn. 208 , 167 N. W. (2d) 55 .