Cited by

In considering the sufficiency of direct evid ence to support a conviction, we analyze the record “to determine whether the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the jurors to reach the verdict which they did.”

When an appellant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction, appellate courts analyze the record “to determine whether the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the jurors to reach the verdict which they did.”

When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, this court conducts “a painstaking analysis of the record to determ ine whether the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the jurors to reach the verdict which they did.” State v. Webb

When applying this standard, “our review on appeal is limited to a painstaking analysis of the rec ord to determine whether the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the jurors to reach the verdict which they did.”

When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, appellate courts conduct “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 reach the verdict which they did.” State v. Webb

When addressing a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, our review “is limited” to a careful “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 reach the verdict which they did.” .

When considering the sufficiency of the evidence suppor ting a defendant’s conviction, we thoroughly analyze the record “to determine whethe r the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorab le to the conviction, was suffi cient to permit the jurors to reach they verdict which they did.” State v. Webb

When addressing a sufficiency -of-the-evidence challenge, this court’s review “is limited to a painstaking analysis of the record to determine whether th e evidence, when viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the jurors to reach the verdict which they did.”

When reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence, this 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 reach the verdict which they did.”

D E C I S I O N When addressing a sufficiency -of-the-evidence challenge, this court’s review “is limited to a painstaking analysis of the reco rd to determine whethe r the evidence, when viewed in a light most favorab le to the conviction, was suffi cient to permit the jurors to reach the verdict which they did.”

D E C I S I O N When a defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a convictio n, “our review on appeal is limited to 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 reach the verdict which they did.” State v. Webb , .

ficiency of evidence, which an appellate [court] reviews in the light most favorable to the verdict.” When reviewing sufficiency of the evidence, this cour t conducts “a painstaking analysis of the record to determine whether the evidence, when view ed in a light most favorable to the conviction, wa s sufficient to permit the jurors to reach the verdict which 6 they did.”

When reviewing sufficiency of the evidence, we conduct “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 reach the verdict which they did.”

When addressing a sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenge, our review “is limited to 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 reach the verdict which they did.” State 5 v. Webb

D E C I S I O N When addressing a sufficiency -of-the-evidence challenge, this court’s review “is limited to 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 reach the verdict which they did.”

Bernhardt v. State , -77 (Minn. 2004) ; State v. 15 Webb

In considering sufficiency-of-the-evidence claims, this court conducts an “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 reach the verdict which they did.” 4 .

State v. Webb , , 430 (Minn. 1989).