12 Minnesota opinions name it 1 courts 1990–2024 2 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Minnesota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Silvernailgreen2 sentences2016State v. Silvernail, 831 N.W.2d 594, 598 (Minn. 2013). 2016State v. Silvernail, 831 N.W.2d 594, 598 (Minn. 2013). | 3 | 3 |
State v. Mooregreen2 sentences2015“If a conviction, or a single element of a criminal offense, is based solely on circumstantial evidence,” Fairbanks, 842 N.W.2d at 307 , “[appellate courts] apply a two- step analysis in determining whether [that] circumstantial evidence is sufficient to 3 support a guilty verdict,” State v. Moore, 846 N.W.2d 83, 88 (Minn. 2014). 2014State v. Moore, 846 N.W.2d 83, 88 (Minn. 2014). | 3 | 3 |
Rew ex rel. T.C.B. v. Bergstromgreen1 sentence2024Rew v. Bergstrom, 845 N.W.2d 764, 785 (Minn. 2014). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Harrisgreen1 sentence2024State v. Harris, 895 N.W.2d 592, 598-601 (Minn. 2017). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Al-Naseergreen1 sentence2024State v. Al-Naseer, 734 N.W.2d 679, 688 (Minn. 2007). 3 When a sufficiency challenge relates to circumstantial evidence, we apply a two- step analysis. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Hayesgreen1 sentence2016State v. Hayes, 831 N.W.2d 546, 552-53 (Minn. 2013). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Palmergreen1 sentence2015The first step is to “identify the circumstances proved.” Palmer, 803 N.W.2d at 733 (quotation omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sawh v. City of Lino Lakes
green
2 sentences2017There is “a two- step analysis to determine whether the government has violated an individual’s procedural due process rights.” Id. 2017The first step is to “identify whether the government has deprived the individual of a protected life, liberty, or property interest.” Id. | 1 | 2017–2017 |
State v. Andersen
green
1 sentence2015State v. Anderson, 784 N.W.2d 320 , 329−30 (Minn. 2010). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Fairbanks
green
1 sentence2015“If a conviction, or a single element of a criminal offense, is based solely on circumstantial evidence,” Fairbanks, 842 N.W.2d at 307 , “[appellate courts] apply a two- step analysis in determining whether [that] circumstantial evidence is sufficient to 3 support a guilty verdict,” State v. Moore, 846 N.W.2d 83, 88 (Minn. 2014). | 1 | 2015–2015 |
State v. Hansen
green
1 sentence1990Hansen, 312 N.W.2d at 102 . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.