Cited by

-03 (Minn. 2017) (discussing circumstantial-evidence standard); (stating that “the heightened scrutiny applies to any disputed element of the conviction that is based on circumstantial evidence”).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the [jury] can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the fact[-]finder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the [ fact- finder] can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

5 can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” d 592, 599 (Minn. 2017) (quotation omitted).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the factfinder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

Direct evidence is “evidence that is based on personal knowledge or observation and that, if true, proves a fact without inference or presumption.” (quotation omitted).

See State v. Harris , (restating that direct evid ence “is based on personal knowledge or observation and .

(applying circumstantial-evidence standard of revi ew to consider whet her state’s evidence established defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the factfinder can infe r whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

possession when (1) the item was found “in a place under defendant’s exclusive control to which other people normally did not have access” or (2) if the item was found in a place to which others had access, “there is a strong probability (inf erable from other eviden ce) that at the time the defendant was consciously or knowingly ex ercising dominion and control over it.” State v. Harris

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the factfinder can infe r whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

“Possession may be proved through evidence of actual or constructive possession.” State v. Harris

-03 (Minn. 2017) (a pplying circumstantial -evidence standard).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the factfinder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

(quotation and citation omitted).

“A de fendant may possess an item jointly with another person.”

Circumstantial evidence, on the other han d, is “evidence from which the factfinder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist” and “always requires an inferential step to prove a fact that is not required with direct evidence.” (quotation omitted).

“Direct evidence is evidence that is based on personal knowledge or observation and that, if true, proves a fact without inference or presumption.” (quotation and alteration omitted).

Direct evidence is “evidence that is based on personal knowledge or observation and that, if true, proves a fact without inference or presumption.” (quotation omitted).

(stating that multiple persons may constructively possess a firearm jointly).

Circumstantial evidence, on the other hand, is “evidence from which the factfinder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist” and “always requires an inferential step to prove a fact that is not required with direct evidence.” State v. Harris , (quotation omitted).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the [jury] can infer whether the facts in dispute existed.” (quotation omitted).

Direct evidence is “evidence that is based on personal knowledge or observation and that, if true, proves a fact without inference or presumption.” State v. Harris , (quotation omitted).

-03 (Minn. 2017) (applying circumstantial-evidence standard to individual element of criminal offense that was proved by circumstantial evidence).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the factfinder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

Circumstantial evidence is “evidence from which the [jury] can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (Mi nn.

Consistent with our standard of review, which requires that we reject evidence that is not consistent with the jury’s verdict, we assume that there was no noise.

“[D]irect evidence is [e]vidence that is based on personal knowledge or observation and that, if true, proves a fact without inference or presumption.” (alteration in original) (quotation omitted).

Circumstantial evidence is defined as “evidence from which the factfinder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist.” (quotation omitted).

3 “Possession may be proved through evidence of actual or constructive possession.” State v. Harris

Circumstantial evid ence is “evidence from which the factfinder can infer whether the facts in dispute existed or did not exist” and “requires an inferential step to prove a fact.” (quotation omitted).

In simpler terms, we “winnow down the evidence presented at trial” to a “subset of facts” that are consistent with the jury’s verdict and “disregard evidence that is inconsistent with the jury’s verdict.” –01 (Minn. 2017).

(discussing elements of possession of firearm by ineligible person).

Direct evidence is “evidence that is based on personal knowledge or observation and that, if true, proves a fact without inference or presumption.” State v. Harris , (quotation omitted).

Direct evidence is “evidence that is based on pers onal knowledge or observation and that, if true, proves a fact without inference or presumption.” State v. Harris , (quotation omitted).

ound the item in a place under the defendant’s exclusive cont rol to which other pe ople normally did not have access” or (2) “if police found the item in a place to which others had access,” by proving that “there is a strong probability (inf erable from other evidence) that at the time 6 the defendant was consciously or knowingly exercising dominion and control over it.” (citation omitted).

“Possession may be proved through evidence of actual or constructive possession.”