Cited by

Commitment of Ince, (stating that a factfinder is in the best position to “weigh the evidence and assess credibility”); (affording “due regard” to the factfinder’s opportunity to “judge the credibility of the witnesses”)).

When “the findings of fact rest almost entirely on expert testimony, the [lower tribunal’s] evaluation of credibility is of particular significance.”

Commitment of Ince, (stating that a factfinder is in the best position to “weigh the evidence and assess credibility”); (affording “due regard” to the factfinder’s opportunity to “judge the credibility of the witnesses”)); accord 10 rev. denied (Minn. June 20, 2023).

Commitment of Kenney, –22 (Minn. 2021), and we give substantial deference to its findings of expert-witness credibility

the supreme court distinguished Rickmyer in a case in which the appellant was civilly committed as mentally ill and dangerous based on evidence that he penetrated the vagina of a young girl with his fingers, thereby causing “the removal of her hymenal tissue,” which “constitutes a serious physical injury,” thereby satisfying the statutory requirement of “serious physical harm.” -21 (Minn. 1995) (citing Minn. Stat. § 253B.02, subd.

A district court’s civil-commitment determination “must be justified by findings based upon evidence at the hearing.”

A district court’s civil-commitment determination “must be justified by findings based upon evidence at the hearing.”

A district court’s civil-commitment determination “must be justified by findings based upon evidence at the hearing.”

d 616, 620 (Minn. 1995).

If findings of fact “rest almost entirely on expert testimony, the [district] court’s evaluation of credibility is of particular signi ficance.”

“Findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous, and due regard shall be given to the opportunity of the [district] court to judge the credibility of witnesses.”

We refer to both entities as “Alpha.” 6 court’s evaluation of credibility is of particular significance.” d 616, 620 (Minn. 1995).

(“Where the findings of fact rest almost entirely on expert testimony, the trial court’s evaluation of credibility is of particular significance.”); (citing this aspect of Knops), rev. denied (Minn. Sept.

3 light most favorable to the district court’s decision.”

See, d 914, 920 (Minn. 2019) (applying de novo review to a claim that challenged the sufficiency of the evidence that depended on the meaning of the statute); d 616, 620 (Minn. 1995) (stating that “whether evidence is sufficient to prove an overt act” as required by a statute “is a legal question and is subject to de novo review”).

Commitment of Ince , (stating that a fact finder is in the best position to “weigh the evidence and assess credibility” ); In re Knops , (affording “due regard” to the factfinder’s opportunity to “judge the credibility of the witnesses”).

On appeal from an order of indeterminate commitment, the district court’s findings of fact are reviewed for clear error and “[t]he record is viewed in the light most favorable to the trial court’s decision.” (appellate courts defer to district court’s assessment of conflicting expert opinions).