Cited by

“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.” (quotation omitted).

When considering a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, an appellate court conducts “a painstaking analysis of the record to determine whether the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the jurors to 15 reach the verdict which they did.” (quotation omitted).

We address each argument in turn while reviewing the “district court’s evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“A 6 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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

We review “a 10 district court’s evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).

“We review a district court’s evidentiary rulings for an abuse of discretion.” (quotation omitted).

Caselaw instructs that “evaluating the admissibility of a statement under [r]ule 807 requires a district court to carefully balance all of the relevant circumstances surrounding the making of the statement at issue, while also considering each of the three prongs set 11 forth within the language of the rule.”

“A district court abuses its discretion when its decis ion is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.” (quotation omitted).

“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. Fernandez Sorto , d 207, 214 (Minn. App. 2024) (), rev. denied (Minn. Dec.

“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.” (quotation omitted).

Because the circumstances here, like in Nyonteh, involve excusing a 4 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.” (quotation omitted).

“Rule 401 reflects a minimal relevancy approach.”

(explaining that evidence is relevant when it helps explain the police investigation).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

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.” (quotation omitted).

Consequently, if relevant evidence could persuade “the jury through illegitimate means, it must be excluded from trial.”

(reversing and remanding for the district court to vacate the conviction for the lesser-included offense but leaving the finding of guilt intact).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

7 Because the challenged evidence is not 7 Under rule 807, a district court looks “at the totality of the circumstances to determine whether [a] hearsay statement has circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness.” (quotation omitted).

“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. Hallmark , (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).

To succeed on a claim of juror impartiality, the appellant “must demonstrate that at least one juror was actually biased against him,” i.e., “that at least one juror had strong and deep impressions of the case that [they] could not set aside and which would prevent [them] from rendering a verdict based on the evidence presented in court.” State v. Hallmark, 9 (quotations omitted).

“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.” (quotation omitted).