Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Webb, 440 N.W.2d 426.

856 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Michael Eugene Walker Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Under the direct evidence standard, 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 6 they did.”
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Mitchell Spry Minn. Ct. App. 2021
When addressing a sufficiency -of-the-evidence challenge, we undertake “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
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Earl Robinson Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Reginald Fanpatrick Wilson Minn. Ct. App. 2021
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Leticia Rene Morales Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael Allen Boisjolie Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Scott Howard Meyer Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Percy Leonard French Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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
State of Minnesota v. Jeffrey Alan Korolchuk Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Otto Rene Gonzalez Bautista Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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
State of Minnesota v. Xavier Alfred Haywood Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.” .
State of Minnesota v. Richard Lanell Adams Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Scott Richard Lind Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Suvwe Peter Ighovojah Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Eithan Armani Green Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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
State of Minnesota v. Phillip Brent Carter, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Tiron Patrick Beane Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Derek Alan Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Chase Allen Holmes Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Steven Kalland Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Dirk Udo McHugh Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Jarred Isaac Mosdal Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Angalie Naidu Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Donald Joseph Hall, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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 , .
State of Minnesota v. Caleb John Permann Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Su Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2020
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Frank Rezac Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Jesse Lee Bonacci-Koski Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Danny Hugh Burns Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. William Daniel Finley Minn. Ct. App. 2020
James Lindley Limper v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Earlynne Joy Redday Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Aaron Duviaze Taylor Minn. Ct. App. 2019
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
State of Minnesota v. Samuel James Mosenden Minn. Ct. App. 2019
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.”
State of Minnesota v. Andre Lamar Beasley Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In the Matter of the Welfare of: C. A. M Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Kent David Olson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Brian John Abrahamson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Tad Isaac Butcher Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Thomas Price Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Steven Ray Odenthal Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Jermaine James McMahon Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Adrian Thomas Howell Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Bernhardt v. State , -77 (Minn. 2004) ; State v. 15 Webb
State of Minnesota v. Terrance Dujuan Mann Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Mariel Alexandra Grimm Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Soyan Mohamed-Rashid Abdirahman Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Roy Paul Sanborn Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Antoine Kenneth James Adkins Minn. Ct. App. 2019
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 of Minnesota v. Robert Michael Windell Minn. Ct. App. 2019