DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Harris, 589 N.W.2d 782.

174 citing documents.

  • State v. Ruoho 685 N.W.2d 451 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Ruoho 685 N.W.2d 451 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Johnson 679 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Johnson 679 N.W.2d 378 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
    Thus, we will not disturb the verdict if, after a careful analysis of the record, we determine that “a jury, giving due regard to the presumption of innocence and to the state’s burden of proof beyond a reasonable doubt, could reasonably conclude that the defendant was guilty based on the facts in the record and any legitimate inferences therefrom.” ().
  • State v. Jones 678 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2004
  • State v. Jones 678 N.W.2d 1 Minn. 2004
  • State v. Brennan 674 N.W.2d 200 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Brennan 674 N.W.2d 200 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. McBride 666 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2003
  • State v. McBride 666 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2003
  • 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); (affir
  • State v. Papadakis 643 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Papadakis 643 N.W.2d 349 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. James 638 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. James 638 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Rochefort 631 N.W.2d 802 Minn. 2001
  • State v. Rochefort 631 N.W.2d 802 Minn. 2001
  • State v. Pinkerton 628 N.W.2d 159 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Pinkerton 628 N.W.2d 159 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Hochstein 623 N.W.2d 617 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Hochstein 623 N.W.2d 617 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Egge 611 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
  • State v. Egge 611 N.W.2d 573 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
    ANALYSIS When reviewing a challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence, this court reviews the record to determine if “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.” (quotation omitted).