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).

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).

“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).

Finally, t he state argues that the evidence is admissible because it was part of the “crime scene.” The state cites cases that discuss the admissibility of objects connected to a crime scene, including State v. Hallmark

d 281, 301 (Minn. 2019) (reviewing the appellant’s pro se argument that he was prejudiced by a sleeping juror as a juror misconduct claim, which requires a party to show actual misconduct and prejudice from the misconduct).

“A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic 13 and the facts on 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 8 erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks 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).

The supreme court has stated “that the term prejudice in Rule 403 does not mean the damage to the opponent’s case that results from the legitimate probative force of the evidence; rather, it refers to the unfair advantage that results from the capacity of the evidence to persuade by illegitimate means.” (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.” (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted); see, (concluding that the district court abused its discretion by erroneously determining that certain testimony was inadmissible as a matter of law when the district court had discretion

“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. 4 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).

“A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on 7 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).

d 281, 300 (Minn. 2019).1 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

“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).

d 281, 291 (Minn. 2019).