Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831.

139 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
A20-0206 A20-0228 A20-0229 Minn. 2021
Partners III-Lofts, LLC, d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011) (“ In reviewing a postconviction court’ s denial of relief, issues of law are reviewed de novo.”).
Diamond Lee Jamal Griffin, Minn. 2021
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an e rroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“A court abuses its di scretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is agains t logic and the facts in the record.”
Minn. 2020
A district court abuses its discretion when its decision to deny relief is “against logic and the facts in the record” or “based on an erroneous view of the law.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.” Riley v. State
Abraham Tony Dolo, Minn. 2020
A postconviction court abuses its discretion when the court’s “decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
Kathryn Ward Blum, et al., Appellants, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
The district court abuses its discretion when its ruling “is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
Hayley Elizabeth Kytta, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A18-1655 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.” Riley v. State
State v. Harvey 932 N.W.2d 792 Minn. 2019
State v. Harvey 932 N.W.2d 792 Minn. 2019
Riley v. State , , 833 (Minn. 2011).
Cynthia Padilla, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A district court abuses its discretion if “its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.” see also Soto , d at 308 n.1 ( ).
State v. Boettcher 931 N.W.2d 376 Minn. 2019
State v. Boettcher 931 N.W.2d 376 Minn. 2019
Riley v. State , , 833 (Minn. 2011).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.” Riley v. State
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
’” Soto, d at 308 n.1 ( ).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is based o n an “erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
A17-0191 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
A district court abuses its discretion when it bases its decision “on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State v. Overweg 914 N.W.2d 410 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Overweg 914 N.W.2d 410 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
*412 Riley v. State , , 833 (Minn. 2011).
A17-1650 A17-1651 A17-1652 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
However, even under this standard, appellate courts may reverse a district cour t’s D-2 ruling when that ruling is “based on an erroneous view of the law.” ().
In the Matter of: Tracy Elizabeth Thompson and o/b/o Minor Child, Minn. 2018
A district court abuses its discretion “when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A district court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an e rroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State v. Mosley 895 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 2017
State v. Mosley 895 N.W.2d 585 Minn. 2017
A postcon- *590 viction court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is based “on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and facts in the record.”
State v. Thomas 891 N.W.2d 612 Minn. 2017
State v. Thomas 891 N.W.2d 612 Minn. 2017
A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an “erroneous view of the law” or is “against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota v. Douglas John Olson 884 N.W.2d 395 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Douglas John Olson 884 N.W.2d 395 Minn. 2016
(applying a clearly erroneous standard to the factual findings underlying a discretionary decision).
Jason Dean Ligtenberg v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jason Dean Ligtenberg v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A postconviction court “abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota v. Larry Maurice Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Larry Maurice Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.” d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011) (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. E. M. L. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bradley James Schnickel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bradley James Schnickel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A district court abuses its discretion when basing its decision on “an erroneous view of the law.”
State of Minnesota v. E. M. L. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“A [district] court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota v. Jason Ryan Williams 862 N.W.2d 701 Minn. 2015