Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Bell, 719 N.W.2d 635.

167 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Joseph Bullhead Minn. Ct. App. 2016
B. Unfair Prejudice Unfair prejudice “is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
Arnold Fritzroy CoCo James, Jr. v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Arnold Fritzroy CoCo James, Jr. v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[U]nfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Ger Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ger Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(holding that the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting evidence of two separate order-for-protection violations).
State of Minnesota v. Reynaldo Benitez Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Reynaldo Benitez Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“When balancing the probative value against the potential prejudice, unfair prejudice is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Yunmie Quiwonkpa Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Yunmie Quiwonkpa Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Evidentiary rulings rest within the discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
Joshua Steven Parsons v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Joshua Steven Parsons v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“[U]nfair prejudice is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. George Cornelius Watkins Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. George Cornelius Watkins Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Gerald Michalec Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Gerald Michalec Minn. Ct. App. 2015
There is “inherent value of evidence of past acts of violence committed by the same defendant against the same victim.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. James Michael Soderbeck Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. James Michael Soderbeck Minn. Ct. App. 2015
considers whether the probative value of the evidence is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.” McCoy, d at 159.2 For purposes of section 634.20, unfair prejudice “is not merely damaging evidence, [or] even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Larry Maurice Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Larry Maurice Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“[U]nfair prejudice is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted)).
State of Minnesota v. Stacy Dean Darrell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Donald William Laquier Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Donald William Laquier Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jackson is correct that evidence is inadmissible if it is unfairly prejudicial, meaning that it “persuades by illegitimate means.”
State of Minnesota v. Stacy Dean Darrell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(), review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Rodney Cap McCowan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Rodney Cap McCowan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Because almost every admission of a prior bad act will be prejudicial, the inquiry is whether the evidence “is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.”
State of Minnesota v. Saaundre Julian Burns Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Saaundre Julian Burns Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“When balancing the probative value against the potential prejudice, unfair prejudice ‘is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.’” d 635, 641 (Minn. 2006) ().
State of Minnesota v. Eric John Henderson-Bey Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Eric John Henderson-Bey Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“When balancing the probative value against the potential prejudice, unfair prejudice is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Alvis Gayles, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Raymond Eugene Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Alvis Gayles, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
For purposes of section 634.20, unfair prejudice “is not merely damaging evidence, [or] 4 even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Raymond Eugene Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
This evidence is unfairly prejudicial only if it “persuades by illegitimate means.”
State of Minnesota v. Shelby Ivan Charles Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Shelby Ivan Charles Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[U]nfair prejudice is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Michael Darron Ware Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Michael Darron Ware Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“Evidentiary rulings rest within the discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Ed Cadwell Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Ed Cadwell Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(stating that unfair admission of relationship evidence “is not merely damaging evidence, [or] even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted)); Lindsey, d at 756 (“Evid
State of Minnesota v. President Pimping Austin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. President Pimping Austin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Here, the relationship evidence was probative because it was “evidence of past acts of violence committed by the same defendant against the same victim.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. John Christopher Winford Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. John Christopher Winford Minn. Ct. App. 2014
and [appellant].” 7 “When balancing the probative value against the potential prejudice, unfair prejudice is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Antanie Devon Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Antanie Devon Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[U]nfair prejudice is not merely damaging evidence, even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Valinski Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Valinski Minn. Ct. App. 2014
For purposes of section 634.20, unfair prejudice “is not merely damaging evidence, [or] even severely damaging evidence; rather, unfair 5 prejudice is evidence that persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
State v. Welle 847 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Welle 847 N.W.2d 52 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Unfair prejudice in the context of Spreigl evidence means that the evidence “persuades by illegitimate means, giving one party an unfair advantage.” (quotation omitted).
In re the Welfare of J.H. 844 N.W.2d 28 Minn. 2014