Cited by

See Roby v. 16 State, (holding that issues, even constitutional issues, are waived on appeal if not raised to the district court).

(“[An appellate court] will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court.”).

(concluding that pro se defendant’s assertions are waived if they contain no argument or legal authority to support allegations); Hecker v. Hecker , n.2 (Minn. App. 1996) (requiring that material assertions of fact be supported by citation to the record), aff’d, d 705 (Minn. 1997); (concluding that appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court”).

Generally, this court will not “decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”

Moreover, an appellate court “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”

n.6 (Minn. 2017) (applying this rule to constitutional questions).

invalidat[ing] any findings.” We decline to address the merits of this argument as we “will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court.”

n to suppress, Feltus argued only that the trooper impermissibly expanded the scope of the traffic stop by “requesting [that she] exit the vehicle to conduct driving impaired testing [sic].” In reviewing a district court’s decision, we “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”

(stating that an appellate court generally will not decide issues that were not raised in the district court).

“[Appellate courts] generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”

Moreover, we “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district co urt.” Roby v. State

Roby v. State , (holding that appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”).

postponed trial caused hi s witnesses to be 26 unavailable, and (3) grandfather’s petition for the HRO was “forged under perjury without home owners authorization, knowledge or consent.” Because Randall did not raise his first two arguments in the district court, they are forfeited on appeal.11 We “will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court.” Roby v. State

Appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not rais ed before the district court.” Roby v. State

See, e.g., Roby v. State , d 354, 357 (Minn. 1996) (explaining that appella te courts generally decline to consider matters not first argued to and considered by the district c ourt).

Generally, an appellate court “will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal proce dure.” Roby v. State

(holding that an issue not raised to the district court is forfeited on appeal).

(stating that appellate court will not decide issues not raised before district court); (stating that inadequately briefed issues are not properly before this court) , review denied (Minn. Aug.

Roby v. State , (declining to consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal).

(applying principle to criminal cases).

But we do not consider arguments raised for the first time on appeal, and Miller did not raise this argument in the district court.

7 (stating appellate courts generall y do not address issues or theo ries not raised in district court).

“This court generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questi ons of criminal procedure.” Roby v. State , (concluding defendant forfeited challenge to probable cause determination by failing to raise issues at omnibus hea ring).

We generally do not consider i ssues not raised before the district court, so this too is not a basis for us to reverse the district court.

d 354, 357 (Minn. 1996).

(“This court generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court, including constitutional questions of criminal procedure.”).

(“This court generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court.”).

See Roby v. State , (noting appellate courts “generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court”).

See Kuhlmann, d at 852; (stating that “appellate courts generally will not decide issues which were not raised before the district court”).