Cited by

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

854 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Townsend 925 N.W.2d 280 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Townsend 925 N.W.2d 280 Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Webb , , 430 (Minn. 1989).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Generally this court applies the traditional standard of review, which requires “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.”
Troy William Drusch, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In sufficiency-of-the-evidence challenges, if an element of the offense is supported by direct evidence, appellate courts examine the record to dete rmine if the evidence is sufficient to permit jurors to reach their verdict when “viewed in the light most favorable to the conviction.” ().
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Bowen 921 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 2019
State v. Bowen 921 N.W.2d 763 Minn. 2019
State v. Webb , , 430 (Minn. 1989).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In considering a claim of insufficient evidence, an appellate 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, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
An appellate court carefully analyze s the record to determine whether the evidence, wh en viewed in a light most favorable to the conviction, was sufficient to permit the fact -finder 5 to reach the verdict that it did, assuming that the fact -finder “believed the state’s witnesses an d disbelieved contrary evidence,” State v. Brocks
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Barthman 917 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Barthman 917 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Webb , , 430 (Minn. 1989).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Richard Willmar Rapatt, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In the Matter of the Welfare of: C. J. D., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Anthony Strickland, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In considering a claim of insufficient ev idence, an appellate 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, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In reviewing a claim of insufficient evidence, “our review on appeal is limited to a painstaking analysis of the record to determine whethe r 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, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
When an appe llant challenges the sufficiency of evidence, an appellate 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 [fact-finder] to reach the verdict which [it] did.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Hall 915 N.W.2d 528 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Hall 915 N.W.2d 528 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Webb , , 430 (Minn. 1989).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Webb , State v. Cox , (applying the same standard for the review of sufficiency of the evidence to ju ry trials and court trials).
Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc. 911 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2018
Great N. Ins. Co. v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc. 911 N.W.2d 510 Minn. 2018
See State v. Webb , , 431 (Minn. 1989) ("Because of our disposition of this issue, we need not reach appellant's other assignments of error.").
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
In considering a claim of insufficient evidence, review by this court is “limi ted 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, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Rogers 912 N.W.2d 687 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Rogers 912 N.W.2d 687 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Webb , , 430 (Minn. 1989).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“Where there is a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, [this court’s] 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 [fact-finder] to reach the verdict which [it] did.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018