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. Cox, 278 N.W.2d 62.

46 citing documents.

  • Minn. 2021
    15 contained in the record, the [jury] could reasonably have found [the] defendant guilty of the crime charged.”
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
    3, if a defendant refrains from carrying out his criminal act because of intervening circumstances.”
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
    State v. Webb , State v. Cox , (applying the same standard for the review of sufficiency of the evidence to ju ry trials and court trials).
  • State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
    the law on abandonment” by telling jury that, because 6 defendant’s entry of store was a substantial step toward commission of robbery, “it did not matter what happened after [defendant] walked into the store”); -67 (Minn. 1979) (affirming factfinder’s rejection of abandonment defense to charge of attempted first-degree murder on ground that factfinder apparently inferred that defendant involuntarily abandoned attempt due to intervening circumstances).
  • State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko 889 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 2017
  • State of Minnesota v. Renee Anita Vasko 889 N.W.2d 551 Minn. 2017
    When reviewing a claim of insufficient evidence to convict, we will “uphold the district court’s finding if, based on the evidence contained in the record, the district court could reasonably have found [the] defendant guilty of the crime charged.” (Minn. 3 Lester Prairie has since amended the ordinance to prohibit the keeping of a junked or abandoned vehicle for longer than 15 days, reduced from the 30-day period that governs Vasko’s case.
  • State v. Franks 765 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Franks 765 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 2009
  • In Re the Welfare of M.E.M. 674 N.W.2d 208 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • In Re the Welfare of M.E.M. 674 N.W.2d 208 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Dominguez 663 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Dominguez 663 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. McCarthy 659 N.W.2d 808 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. McCarthy 659 N.W.2d 808 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Papadakis 643 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Papadakis 643 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Thomas 590 N.W.2d 755 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Thomas 590 N.W.2d 755 Minn. 1999
    (applying standard to jury verdict); (applying the same standard to a bench trial).
  • State v. Hough 585 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Hough 585 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Zenanko 552 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Zenanko 552 N.W.2d 541 Minn. 1996
    nce supporting defendant’s guilt is overwhelming and that the facts and circumstances, when looked at in the light most favorable to the verdict, are wholly consistent with guilt of burglary, felony murder, premeditated murder, and its attempt, and inconsistent with any theory of defendant’s innocence.
  • State v. Lehikoinen 463 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Lehikoinen 463 N.W.2d 770 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Bonynge 450 N.W.2d 331 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Bonynge 450 N.W.2d 331 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Fairchild 444 N.W.2d 572 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • State v. Fairchild 444 N.W.2d 572 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
  • State v. Langaas 426 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Langaas 426 N.W.2d 479 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Mach 411 N.W.2d 574 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Mach 411 N.W.2d 574 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Woodward 408 N.W.2d 927 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Woodward 408 N.W.2d 927 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Andow 386 N.W.2d 230 Minn. 1986
  • State v. Andow 386 N.W.2d 230 Minn. 1986
    (an attempted crime is not voluntarily abandoned when abandonment is prompted by fear of being caught).
  • State v. Wiley 366 N.W.2d 265 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Wiley 366 N.W.2d 265 Minn. 1985
    State v. Mytych, 292 Minn. 248, 252
  • State v. Hughes 355 N.W.2d 500 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Hughes 355 N.W.2d 500 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Hyland 355 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Hyland 355 N.W.2d 214 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    ANALYSIS On appeal, we must “apply the same standard of review to cases heard before a court without a jury as is applied to those heard by a jury.”
  • State v. Bouwman 354 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Bouwman 354 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Casby 348 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Casby 348 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 1984
    Nonetheless, on appeal this court must view all evidence, including circumstantial evidence, “in a manner most favorable to the state and assume that the [trial court] disbelieved contradictory testimony.”