Cited by

Stated differently, a proper factual basis exists if “the record contains a showing that there is credible evidence available which would support a jury verdict that defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to which he pled guilty.” (quotation omitted).

dmitted by the defendant during the colloquy.” (reviewing a d 852 (Minn. 2016)).

(noting that the jury draws an inference of intent “from the totality of circumstances” (quotation omitted)).

But the Minnesota Supreme Court has never held that “the use of leading questions automatically invalidates a guilty plea.”

Our caselaw clearly states t hat for a guilty plea to be accepted, “the [district court] must make certain that facts exist from which the defendant ’s guilt of the crime charged can be reasonably inferred.” (emphasis added) (quotation omitted) .

“Intent can be inferred from the idea that a person intends the natural consequences of his or her actions.” (quotation omitted).

6 judge must make certain that facts exist from which the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged can be reasonably inferred.”

E.g., Raleigh, d at 94-96 (concluding that the guilty plea was accurate and explaining that although counsel used leading questions, “the factual basis for [the] plea [was] sufficient, 7 despite its disfavored format”); (observing that the Minnesota Supreme Court has “never held that the use of leading questions automatically invalidates a guilty plea”).

Stated somewhat differently, a proper factual basis exists 6 if “‘the record contains a showing that there is credible evidence available which would support a jury verdict that defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to which he pled guilty.’” ().

“To be accurate, a plea must be established on a proper factual basis.” (quotation omitted).

Before the district court accepts a guilty plea, the accuracy standard requires the district court to “make certain that facts exist from which the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged can be reasonably inferred.” (quotation omitted).

This requirement “is satisfied if the record contains a showing that there is credible evidence available which would support a jury verdict that [a] defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to which he [pleaded] guilty.” (quotation omitted).

“Intent is generally proved by inferences drawn from a person’s words or actions in light of all the surrounding circumstances.” (quotation omitted); (noting that the jury draws an inference of intent “from the totality of circumstances” (quotations omitted)).

Evidence of intent is typically circumstantial because “[i]ntent is generally proved by inferences drawn from a person’s words or actions in light of all the surrounding circumstances.” (quotation omitted); (noting that the jury draws an inference of intent “from the totality of the circumstances” (quotations omitted)).

While recognizing that the use of leading questions had never “automatically” invalidated a guilty plea, in 2016 the supreme court reminded trial courts, “[W]e have repeatedly discouraged the use of leading questions to establish a factual basis.”

“To be accurate, a plea must be established on a proper factual basis.” (quoting Raleigh, d at 94).

The district court judge must ensure there are “sufficient facts on the record to support a conclusion tha t defendant’s conduct falls within the charge to which he desires to plead guilty.” (stating that the district court judge “must make certain that facts exist from which the defendant’s guilt of the crime” to which he is pleading guilty can be reasonably inferred ).

n.2 (Minn. 2016) (declining to consider a postconviction claim “lacking supporting argument or authority unless prejudicial error appears obvious upon inspection of the record”).3 Alternatively, Knowles contends his motion is timely as a postconviction petition under two exceptions to the two-year time limit.

“The factual-basis requirement is satisfied if the record contains a showing that there is credible evidence available that would support a jury verdict that defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to which he pled guilty.” (quotation omitted).

The accuracy standard requires a district court judge considering a guilty plea to “make certain that facts exist from which the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged can be reasonably inferred.” (quotation omitted).

The district court must ensure that “facts exist from which the defendant’s guilt of the crime charge d can be reasonably inferred.” (quotation omitted) .

“The factual- basis requirement is satisfied if the record contains a showing that there is credible evidence available which would support a jury verdict that defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to which he pled guilty.” 2 Technological advancements, particularly increased accessibility to advanced surveillance methods, has made voyeurism an “increasingly prevalent and unsettling threat to human dignity and the right to privacy.” Maria Pope, Technology Arms Peeping Toms wit

This requirement “is satisfied if the record contains a showing that there is credible evid ence available which would support a jury verdict that [a] defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to which he [pleaded] guilty.” Nelson v. State , (quotation omitted).

Stated somewhat differently, a proper factual basis exists if “‘ the record contains a showing that there is credible evidence available which would support a jury verdict that defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to which he pled guilty.’” (quoting State v. Genereux , ).

But, as the supreme court has explained, the accuracy standard requires a district court judge considering a guilty plea to “make certain that facts exist from which the defe ndant’s guilt of the crime charged can be reasonably inferred.” (emphasis added) (quotation omitted).

But even when a defendant does not directly admit to an elem ent of the offense, “a distri ct court may nevertheless draw inferences from the facts adm itted to by the defendant.” Rosendahl v. State , (citing Nelson v. State , ).

Nelson v. State , State v. Brown , 10 (“A guilty plea cannot be induced by unfulfilled or unfulfillable promises .

But “[e]ven if an elemen t to an offense is not verba lized by the defendant [at the plea hearing], a district court may nevertheless draw inferences from the facts admitted to by the defendant.” (emphasis omitted) (citing Nelson v. State , ).

Typically, a factual basis is laid by “asking the defendant to express in his own words what happened.” (quotation omitted).

See Nelson v. State , (“The intelligence requirement ensures that a defendant understands the charges against him, the rights he is waiving, and the consequences of his plea.”) (quoting State v. Raleigh , ).

See Rosendahl, __ N.W.2d at __, 2021 WL 416699 , at *4 ; (Minn. 2016) (noting that the factual basis of a plea is inaccurate when “the defendant makes statements that negat e an essential element of the charged 9 district court may only extend an order for protection for 50 years if it finds that “the respondent has violated a prior or existing order for protection o

“‘It is well established that befo re a plea of guilty can be accepted, the [district court] judge must make certain that facts exist from which the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged can be reasonably inferred.’” ().

The district court must ensure that “facts exist from which the defendant’s guilt of the crime charged can be reasonably inferred.” (quotation omitted).

The voluntariness requirement protects a defendant from pleading guilty “due to improper pressure or coercion.” Nelson v. State , (quotation omitted) .

(“[W]e have never held that the use of leading questions automatically invalidates a guilty plea, and we decline to do so in this case.”).

A proper factual basis exists “if the record contains a showing that there is credible evidence available which woul d support a jury verdict that [the] defendant is guilty of at least as great a crime as that to whic h [s]he pled guilty.” (quotation omitted).