Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Chavarria-Cruz, 839 N.W.2d 515.

82 citing documents.

Derrick Trevor Griffin v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2016
Derrick Trevor Griffin v. State of Minnesota 883 N.W.2d 282 Minn. 2016
Second, Griffin asserts violations of Minn. Stat. § 609.035 (2014) and the Double Jeopardy Clauses of the United States and Minnesota Constitutions,1 which protect defendants from multiple prosecutions or multiple sentences for the same offense
State of Minnesota v. Ian Christopher Mitchell 881 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ian Christopher Mitchell 881 N.W.2d 558 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[S]ection 609.04 bars multiple convictions under different sections of a criminal statute for acts committed during a single behavioral incident.”2 (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Marcus Michael Barshaw 879 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Marcus Michael Barshaw 879 N.W.2d 356 Minn. 2016
(noting the evidence must be construed in the light most favorable to the verdict, “disbeliev[ing] any testimony conflicting with that verdict” (quoting Holliday, d at 562)).
State of Minnesota v. Lorenzo Leontay Washington Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Alie Christine Theodore Dorn 875 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Alie Christine Theodore Dorn 875 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 515, 519 (Minn. 2013).
State of Minnesota v. Lorenzo Leontay Washington Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Chad Allan Mikiska Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Chad Allan Mikiska Minn. Ct. App. 2016
We view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, d 515, 519 (Minn. 2013), and we defer to the fact-finder’s credibility determinations, 2 To support Mikiska’s conviction, the state was required to prove that (1) Mikiska was required to register as a predatory offender; (2) the time period during which he was r
State of Minnesota v. Nathan Edward Palmer Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Nathan Edward Palmer Minn. Ct. App. 2015
When reviewing for sufficiency of evidence, this court “view[s] the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and assume[s] that the factfinder disbelieved any testimony conflicting with that verdict.” (quotation omitted).
In the Matter of the Welfare of: L. J. S., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
In the Matter of the Welfare of: L. J. S., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A defendant cannot be convicted on the basis of the “testimony of an accomplice, unless it is corroborated by such other evidence as tends to convict the defendant of the commission of the offense.” Minn. Stat. § 634.04 (2014)
State of Minnesota v. Grady Dean Pederson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Grady Dean Pederson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
We “view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and assume that the factfinder disbelieved any testimony conflicting with that verdict.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Raymond Struzyk 869 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Raymond Struzyk 869 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 2015
525 (Minn.2013) (stating that the Double Jeopardy Clause protects against “a second prosecution of the same offense after an acquittal” (quoting State v. Leroy, 604 *)).
State of Minnesota v. Ali Mehralian Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ali Mehralian Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Douglas Ankney Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Douglas Ankney Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Lori Ann Fulwiler Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Lori Ann Fulwiler Minn. Ct. App. 2015
We “view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and assume that the factfinder disbelieved any testimony conflicting with that verdict.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Eric John Henderson-Bey Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Eric John Henderson-Bey Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Alfred Smith, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Alfred Smith, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
We “view the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and assume that the factfinder disbelieved any testimony conflicting with that verdict.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Terry Ross Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Terry Ross Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2015