Cited by

If the defendant does not object to the alleged misconduct, “[w]e review the prosecutor’s statements under a modified plain error analysis.” d 716, 726 (Minn. 2022) (citing State v. Ramey , -300 (Minn. 2006)).

n.6 (Minn. 2006) (“The court of appeals does not exercise supervisory powers that are reserved to [the supreme] court.”).

See, (“[A] prosecutor is a minister of justice whose obligation is to guard the rights of the accused as well as to enforce the rights of the public.” (quotation omitted)); Berger v. United States, 295 U.S. 78, 88 (1935) (holding that the interest of a prosecutor “is not that it shall win a case, but t

Under that test, the appellant must first demonstrate “that the prosecutor’s conduct constitutes an error that is plain.”

Although the “district court is in the best position to attempt to remedy the effects of [any] misconduct,” such as by offering curative instructions, no curative instruction followed the prosecutor’s misstatement of law here.

“An error is plain if it was ‘clear’ or ‘obvious’” and is typically established where the prosecutor’s conduct “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotation omitted).

9 “An error is plain if it was clear or obvious,” usually when “the error contravenes [caselaw], a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotation omitted).

“An error is plain if it is ‘clear’ or ‘obvious,’ which is typically established 12 ‘if the error contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.’” ().

An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” , 302 (Minn. 2006).

An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”

Prosecutors are ministers of justice who “have an affirmative obligation to ensure that a defendant receives a fair trial, no matter how strong the evidence of guilt.”

The central concern regarding prosecutorial-misconduct claims “is that [the] misconduct may deny the defendant’s right to a fair trial.”

An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of 8 conduct.” , 302 (Minn 2006).

“An error is plain if it ‘contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.’” ().

n.6 (Minn. 2006) (“The court of appeals does not exercise supervisory powers that are reserved to [the supreme] court.”).

[appellate courts] -300 (Minn. 2006), under which the defendant [must show] that the misconduct constitutes (1) error, (2) that was plain.” State v. Westrom , d 145, 157 (Minn. 2024) (quotation omitted).

“An error is plain if it is clear or obvious,” which is typically established “if the error contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotation omitted).

251 (Minn. 2023); (Minn. 2 Williams challenges Z.A.’s statements on a BWC videorecording that a man is a “fugitive” with an active warrant for his arrest.

“An error is plain if it ‘contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.’” ().

Allegations of unobjected-to prosecutorial misconduct are reviewed under a modified plain-error test, d 294, 299 (Minn. 2006) , while any objected-to prosecutorial misconduct is reviewed for harmless error

An error is plain if it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.”

is that [the] misconduct may deny the defendant’s right to a fair trial.” d 294, 300 (Minn. 2006).