Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Guzman, 892 N.W.2d 801.

166 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Timothy Lee Heller Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Clinton Albert Christopher Juring Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A defendant “must comply with established rules of procedure and evidence.”
State of Minnesota v. Julian Daniel Valdez Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Julian Daniel Valdez Minn. 2024
(Minn. 10 Valdez’s stepbrother, the person in peril, also testified that he could have retreated when Gutierrez initially attacked him—a point in time before Gutierrez tackled the stepbrother and Valdez used of force.
State of Minnesota v. Travis Clay Andersen Minn. Ct. App. 2024
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. Benjamin Herman Bobo Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Chris Henry Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Azzel Mickey Lee Foster Minn. Ct. App. 2024
A defendant “must comply with established rules of procedure and evidence.” d 801, 811 (Minn. 2017) (quotation omitted) .
State of Minnesota v. Savanna Novel Adams Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Davion Robert Magee Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Gilberto Dominguez-Solis Minn. Ct. App. 2024
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. William Arthur Kalligher Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. William Arthur Kalligher Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Nicholas John Reinert Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Nicholas John Reinert Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota Respondent v. Anthony Alton Holloway Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota Respondent v. Anthony Alton Holloway Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Steven Paul Hess Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Dennis John Edmondson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Dennis John Edmondson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Tarik Toyshawn Smith-Whitmore Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Scott Baker Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Tarik Toyshawn Smith-Whitmore Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Scott Baker Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Elsa E. Segura Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Elsa E. Segura Minn. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Terrance Frelix, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jeremiah Zekial Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Paul Scott Seeman Minn. Ct. App. 2024
“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. Ronald Curtis Mitchell Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“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. Jacob Carl Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“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. Samuel James Lyons Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Samuel James Lyons Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“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, Minn. 2023
“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.”
Housing & Redevelopment Authority of Duluth, MN v. Rodney Young Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2023
A district court has “considerable latitude in selecting language for jury instructions,” id., but it abuses its discretion “if the challenged instruction confuses, misleads, or materially misstates the law.”
State of Minnesota v. Kevin Joseph Hibbler Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“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. George Jerry Matlock Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“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.”
, A22-0290 Minn. 2023
“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 v. 9 Guzman
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Jacob Hunt Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Jeramy John Wharton Minn. Ct. App. 2023
19, 2019); (considering the context and purpose of a statement by a witness about incarceration).
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2023
“ 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. Vincent James Tran Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“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. Dak Luk Ret Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(stating that an evidentiary error only requires reversal of a conviction if it was prejudicial).
State of Minnesota v. Terrence Demon Bailey Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law.”
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Joseph Altobelli Minn. Ct. App. 2023
against logic and the facts in the record.”
State of Minnesota v. Cedric Gershone Gibbs Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Appellate courts will not reverse an evidentiary ruling unless the appellant shows “both that the district court abused its discretion in admitting the evidence and that the appellant was there by prejudiced.”
State of Minnesota v. Hassan Abdi Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“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. Antone David Davis Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“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. Erik Harrison Gawtry Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“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.”