Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite Loving v. State, 891 N.W.2d 638.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On a claim of insufficient evidence, this court conducts “a painstaking review of the record to determine whether the evidence and the reasona ble inferences drawn therefrom, viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, were sufficient to allow the jury to reach its verdict.” (quotation omitted).
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
- State v. Petersen 910 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2018
-
State v. Petersen
910 N.W.2d 1
Minn. 2018
Loving v. State , , 643 (Minn. 2017).
- State v. Longo 909 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
-
State v. Longo
909 N.W.2d 599
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Loving v. State , , 643 (Minn. 2017) (quotation omitted).
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(“[A]s in most cases involving a state of mind, the State pr oved the element .
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(applyi ng circumstantial-evidence test when there is no direct evidence of individual’s state of mind); d 469, 474 (Minn. 2010) (holding that a conviction based on circumstantial evidence warrants heightened scrutiny).
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Criminal defendants have a “constitutiona l right to a meaningf ul opportunity to present a complete defense.” Loving v. State , (quotation omitted).
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Loving v. State , (quotations and citations omitted) .
- State v. Luby 904 N.W.2d 453 Minn. 2017
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
–50 (Minn. 2017) (remanding with instructions to vacate convictions of unsentenced, duplicative offenses while leaving jury’s guilty verdicts intact).
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
When addressing a sufficiency -of-the-evidence challenge, “we conduct a painstaking review of the r ecord to determine whether the evidence and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, viewed in a light most favorable to the verdict, were sufficient to allow the jury to reach its verdict.” (quotation omitted).
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017