Cited by

n.5 (Minn. 2020) ( n.8 (Minn. 1997)).

y itself and apart from its relation to official coercion,” does not “dispose of the inquiry into constitutional ‘voluntariness,’” and absent coercive police activity “causally related to the confession, there is simply no basis for concluding that any state actor has deprived a criminal defendant of due process of law.” Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 164 (1986); (“The fact that a defendant suffers from a mental deficiency is, alone, insufficient to render a statement .

overruled on other grounds by State v. McCoy , n.6 (Minn. 2004).

f appellate review of the district court’s competency finding this way, rephrasing a characterization it made ten years earlier: We independently review the record to determine if the district court gave “proper weight” to the evidence produced and if “its finding of competency is adequately supported by the record.” (d 276, 283 (Minn. 1997)).

ict court should consider when deciding whether to admit the entirety of a recording: whether “it is necessa ry to (1) explain the admitted portion, (2) place the admitted portion in context, (3) avoid misleading the trier of fact, or (4) insure a fair and impartial understanding.” United States v. Sweiss, 814 F.2d 1208, 1211-12 (7th Cir. 1987) (quotation omitted); -87 (Minn. 1997) (noting that rule 106 “applies only where it is necessary to give the jury a full understanding of the facts and it

(stating that “Minnesota does not recogn ize the defense of diminished 16 responsibility”).

at 238 (quoting State v. Mills , , 283 (Minn. 1997) ).

-83 (Minn. 1997) (affirming a district court’s finding that defendant was able to rationally consult with her attorney where she was clearly aware of the participants of the court proceedings , was directable, and had a good relationship with one of her attorneys).

“[R]elationship evidence is character evidence that may be offered ‘to show the strained relationship between the accused and the victim [and] is relevant to establishing motive and intent and is therefore admissible.’” State v. Loving, 6 () (quotation marks omitted).

“Character evidence which tends to show the ‘strained relationship’ between the accused and the victim is relevant to establishing motive and intent and is therefore admissible.”

(noting that the strained relationship also put the acts into context)

“Character evidence which tends to show the ‘strained relationship’ between the accused and the victim is relevant to establishing motive and intent and is therefore admissible.”

“Character evidence which tends to show the ‘strained relationship’ between the accused and the victim is relevant to establishing motive and intent and is therefore admissible.”

d 276, 286–87 (Minn. 1997).

(holding that “strained relationship” evidence is admissible to establish motive or intent).

404(b), relationship evidence is character evidence that may be offered “to show the ‘strained relationship’ between the accused and the victim [and] is relevant to establishing motive and intent and is therefore admissible.”

See Vick, d at 685 ; , 284 n. 6 (Minn.1997) (recognizing that the defendant’s objection that testimony was improper was waived on *467 appeal because he failed to object at trial); Ford, d at 615 (recognizing that a defendant’s contention that a cautionary instruction should have been given at the time the evidence was received i

(noting that police, before obtaining statement held voluntary, did not view defendant as a suspect and were talking to her merely to establish rapport and understand the case).

n that the victim fabricated the incident); -37 (Minn.1998) (allowing evidence of defendant’s prior assault of the victim to show motive and intent to kill her); (allowing evidence of a prior bad act to show the strained relationship between defendant and his mother to show motive for killing her); (allowing evidence of' defendant’s prior attempt to poison the victim to show the strained relationship between the victim and defendant and motive and intent for murder); (admitting testimony of defe

“Character evidence which tends to show the ‘strained relationship’ between the accused and the victim is relevant to establishing motive and intent and is therefore admissible.” ().

Similarly, we recognized that “[cjharacter evidence which tends to show the ‘strained relationship’ between the accused and the victim is relevant to establishing motive and intent and is therefore admissible.” Id.