Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Mems, 708 N.W.2d 526.

116 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Paul Omol Arkangelo Uchodu, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Appellant also argues that the evidence is insufficient because E.M.’s testimony was inconsistent and uncorroborate d. “Inconsistencies or conf licts between one witness and another do not necessarily constitute false testimony or serve as a basis for reversal.” State v. Mems
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“There is the presumption that a judge ha s discharged his or her judicial duties properly.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
See State v. Mems , (“Assessing the credibility of a witness and the weight to be given a witness’s testimony is exclusively the province of the [factfinder].”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Inconsistencies or conflic ts between one witness and another do not necessarily constitute false testimony or serve as a basis for reversal.”
State of Minnesota v. Earl Alfonso Culver Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Earl Alfonso Culver Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 526, 532 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Leonard Caruthers Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Dennis James McCormick Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Dennis James McCormick Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Leonard Caruthers Minn. Ct. App. 2017
[f]ear of immediate bodily harm.” “Assessing the credibility of a witness and the weight to be given a witness’s testimony is exclusively the province of the [fact-finder].” d 526, 531 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Paula Mirare Overby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Paula Mirare Overby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Corey Gordon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Corey Gordon Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Wayne Elias Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Wayne Elias Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joeseph Norman Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jeannie Frances Ball Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joeseph Norman Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jeannie Frances Ball Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But the fact-finder “is free to accept part and reject part of a witness’s testimony.” d 526, 531 (Minn. 2006).
State of Minnesota v. Randall Ferrell Decker Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Randall Ferrell Decker Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Assessing the credibility of a witness and the weight to be given a witness’s testimony is exclusively the province of the jury.”
State of Minnesota v. Ruben Alonso Avendano Contreras Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ruben Alonso Avendano Contreras Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Wayne Deante Akis Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Wayne Deante Akis Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“Assessing the credibility of a witness and the weight to be given to a witness’s testimony is exclusively the province of the jury.”
State of Minnesota v. Lori Ann Fulwiler Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Lori Ann Fulwiler Minn. Ct. App. 2015
at she did not make the threatening statements and that the state’s witnesses were lying, pointing to inconsistencies in the witnesses’ testimony regarding whether the threat included the use of a gun versus “bashing heads in.” But “[i]nconsistencies or conflicts between one witness and another do not necessarily constitute false testimony or serve as a basis for reversal.”
State of Minnesota v. Spidel Wayne Browder Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Daniel Morris Johnson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Daniel Morris Johnson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
judicial duties properly.”
State of Minnesota v. Spidel Wayne Browder Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The jury is free to accept part and reject part of a witness’s testimony.”
State of Minnesota v. Bernard Miles Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Bernard Miles Minn. Ct. App. 2014
And “[i]nconsistencies or conflicts between one witness and another do not necessarily constitute false testimony or serve as a basis for reversal.”
State v. Scruggs 822 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 2012
State v. Scruggs 822 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 2012
(stating it is the exclusive province of the jury to assess the credibility of a witness and the weight to be given to a witness’s testimony, and “[t]he jury is free to accept part and reject part of a witness’s testimony”).
State v. Beecroft 813 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 2012
State v. Beecroft 813 N.W.2d 814 Minn. 2012
State v. Nissalke 801 N.W.2d 82 Minn. 2011
State v. Nissalke 801 N.W.2d 82 Minn. 2011
State v. Sailee 792 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Sailee 792 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
This is a heavy burden because “[t]here is the presumption that a judge has discharged his or her judicial duties properly.”
State v. Andersen 784 N.W.2d 320 Minn. 2010
State v. Jenkins 782 N.W.2d 211 Minn. 2010
State v. Jenkins 782 N.W.2d 211 Minn. 2010
“ ‘Misrepre *224 sentations invalidate a warrant when they are (1) deliberately or recklessly made, and (2) material to establishing probable cause, meaning probable cause could likely not be established without them.’ ” ().
Francis v. State 781 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 2010
Francis v. State 781 N.W.2d 892 Minn. 2010
State v. Loving 775 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 2009
State v. Loving 775 N.W.2d 872 Minn. 2009
(“What evidence to present and which witnesses to call at trial are tactical decisions properly left to the discretion of trial counsel.”).