Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Amos, 658 N.W.2d 201.

492 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Timeshia Reagan Frye Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the trial court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” State v. Amos
State v. Patzold 917 N.W.2d 798 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Patzold 917 N.W.2d 798 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Amos , , 203 (Minn. 2003) (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Shawn Michael Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2018
D E C I S I O N Exclusion of Evidence “Evidentiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the trial court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of that discretion.”
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Michael Passon Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Luis Alberto Muniz Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Kyle Grayling Tweed Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Robert Howard Nordquist Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” State v. Amos , (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Donyell Tyrone Roberts Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Jerry Robert Deno Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Dontania Danielle Petrie Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.”
State of Minnesota v. Shawn Timothy Cermak Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Charles Edward Love Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Kaiser Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(Minn. 6Kaiser also frames these evidentiary challenges as a denial of his right to confront witnesses under the Sixth A mendment of the United States Constitution, and Article 1, section 6, of the Minnesota Constitution .
State of Minnesota v. Darnell McDaniels Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Brock Dupree Lam Seawright Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Wind Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Octavius Tobias Riddley Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the trial court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Kyle Richard Greene Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Evidentiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the [district] court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
State v. Taylor 910 N.W.2d 60 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Taylor 910 N.W.2d 60 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Amos , , 203 (Minn. 2003).
State of Minnesota v. Lloyd Dale Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. David Robert Davidson Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” (citation omitted).
State v. Winbush 912 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Winbush 912 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Amos , , 203 (Minn. 2003) (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Ahmed Abdirahim Abdi Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that app ellant was thereby prejudiced.” State v. Amos , (citations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Ezel Scott Minn. Ct. App. 2018
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” State v. Amos , (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Donald Deundre Harris, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Cory Wiedeman Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Roger Edward Naghash Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Evidentiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the [district] court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
State of Minnesota v. Guy Israel Greene Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.”
State of Minnesota v. Marcus Tavon Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Alexis Elview Hancock Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Charles Steven Turman Minn. Ct. App. 2017
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” State v. Amos , 3 (Minn. 2003) (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Karyl Antone Ingalls Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In the Matter of the Welfare of: C. W. A., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2017
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” (Mi nn.
State of Minnesota v. Sandra Grazzini-Rucki Minn. Ct. App. 2017
On appeal, the appellant has th e burden of establishing that the trial court abused its discretion and that appe llant was thereby prejudiced.” State v. Amos , (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Devon Maurice Goode Minn. Ct. App. 2017
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” State v. Amos , (citation omitted).
State v. Souder 902 N.W.2d 86 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Souder 902 N.W.2d 86 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
We add that, although an appellant has the burden to demonstrate both error and prejudice, Souder also does not attempt to • explain how the alleged evidentiary error unfairly prejudiced her case.
State of Minnesota v. Steven Bernard Edwards Minn. Ct. App. 2017
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that appellant was thereby prejudiced.” (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Rarity Shemeire Abdullah Minn. Ct. App. 2017
On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the [district] court abused its discretion and that app ellant was thereby prejudiced.” (citations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Oji Konata Markham Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Evi dentiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the [district] court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
State of Minnesota v. Miguel Angel Rodriguez Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Evidentiary rulings rest within the sound discretion of the [district] court and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion.”
State of Minnesota v. Justin Michael Lang Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A district court’s evidentiary rulings generally will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of discretion, State v. Flores , and it is the appellant who bears the burden of establishing that the district court abused its discretion and that he was prejudiced as a result
State of Minnesota v. Christopher Thomas Russell Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Scott Marlin Morey Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jason David Hoversten Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Joshua Steven Mittelsted Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Trevor Joseph Steven Kottke Minn. Ct. App. 2017