Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Peou, 579 N.W.2d 471.

57 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Jamie Sara Schmeichel Minn. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Jamie Sara Schmeichel Minn. 2026
If the instructions, when read as a whole, “correctly state[] the law in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.” d 471, 475 (Minn. 1998).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
d 150, 155 (Minn. 1988).
State of Minnesota v. Kenwan Deshawn Hunter Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Kenwan Deshawn Hunter Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Appellate courts “will not disturb a verdict if the jury, acting with due regard for the presumption of innocence and the burden of finding guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, could reasonably conclude that the defendant was guilty.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
(d 471, 475 (Minn. 1998)).
Deshon Israel Bonnell, Minn. 2022
at 271–72, 274 (holding that felony murder applied when the defendant was robbing a liquor store and killed the victim during the course of the robbery) ; (upholding felony murder conviction when defendant entered a store with the intent to commit robbery and then committed murders during that robbery).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Elwin Louis Klimek, petitioner, Appellant, 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. 2017
When reviewing ju ry instructions, “the court’s charge to the jury must be read as a whole, and if, when so read, it corr ectly states the law in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.”
State of Minnesota v. Cornelius Kinte Payton Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Cornelius Kinte Payton Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Melody June Fay Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Melody June Fay Minn. Ct. App. 2015
If the instructions, read as a whole, correctly state the law “in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.”
State of Minnesota v. Ty-Yn Shakhaun Holley Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ty-Yn Shakhaun Holley Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Niles Hubbard Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Eddie Niles Hubbard Minn. Ct. App. 2015
If the instructions, read as 20 a whole, correctly state the law “in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.”
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Gary Mason Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Gary Mason Minn. Ct. App. 2015
If the instructions, read as a whole, correctly state the law “in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.”
State of Minnesota v. Carl Antonio Wilks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Carl Antonio Wilks Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Devens 852 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Joseph Devens 852 N.W.2d 255 Minn. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Ahavel Abimbola Scherz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Ahavel Abimbola Scherz Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Anderson 789 N.W.2d 227 Minn. 2010
State v. Anderson 789 N.W.2d 227 Minn. 2010
In addition, “the court’s charge to the jury must be read as a whole, and if, when so read, it correctly states the law in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.”
State v. PTACEK 766 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. PTACEK 766 N.W.2d 355 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
If the instructions correctly state “the law in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.”
State v. Rucker 752 N.W.2d 538 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Rucker 752 N.W.2d 538 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Laine 715 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 2006
State v. Laine 715 N.W.2d 425 Minn. 2006
If the instructions, when read as a whole, “correctly state[ ] the law in language that can be understood by the jury, there is no reversible error.”
State v. Hannon 703 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 2005
State v. Hannon 703 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 2005
State v. Moore 699 N.W.2d 733 Minn. 2005
State v. Moore 699 N.W.2d 733 Minn. 2005
State v. Johnson 699 N.W.2d 335 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Johnson 699 N.W.2d 335 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Al-Naseer 678 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Al-Naseer 678 N.W.2d 679 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Darris 648 N.W.2d 232 Minn. 2002
State v. Darris 648 N.W.2d 232 Minn. 2002
See, -16, 20 (Minn.1996) (affirming conviction when appellant shot and killed driver of car appellant was robbing); -45 (Minn.1995); (affirming conviction when appellant and others set ou
State v. Kuhnau 622 N.W.2d 552 Minn. 2001