Cited by

This court reviews “the denial of a petition for postconviction relief for an abuse of discretion.”

7 , rev. denied (Minn. July 18, 2017).

3 and review factual issues to determine “whether there is sufficient evidence in the record to sustain the postconviction court’s findings.” (quotation omitted).

“[A] postconviction court may summarily deny a claim that is procedurally barred by the Knaffla rule.”

(requiring deference to credibility determinations).

In reviewing the district court’s grant of postconviction relief, we will affirm the district court unless “it has exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law, or made clearly erroneous factual findings.” () (internal quotation marks omitted).

Appellate courts “review the denial of a petition for postconviction relief for an abuse of discretion.”

DECISION Appellate courts “review the denial of a petition for postconviction relief for an abuse of discretion.”

“We review the denial of a petition for postconviction relief for an abuse of discretion.”

“ A postconviction court abuses its discretion when it has exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, based its ruling on an erroneous view of the law, or made clearly erroneous factual findings.” (quotation omitted).

A postconviction court abuses its discretion when it has exercised its discretion in an arbitrary or capricious manner, based its ruling on an erroneous view of 4 the law, or made clearly erroneous factual findings.” (quotations and citation omitted).

This court “review[s] the denial of a petition for postconviction relief for an abuse of discretion.”

An appellate court reviews “the denial of a petition for postconviction relief for an abuse of discretion.” Pearson v. State

(stating the summary dismissal of a postconviction petition is reviewed for an abuse of discretion).

Furthermore, a petitioner must “show a reasonable probability that the end result of the criminal process would have been more favorable by reason of a plea to a lesser charge or a sentence of less prison time.” Id.; d 590, 598 (Minn. 2017).