Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 Minnesota opinions name it 2 courts 2008–2015 0 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. Andersengreen2 sentences2015Recently we discussed the circumstantial evidence standard of review for sufficiency challenges in State v. Andersen, 784 N.W.2d 320 (Minn.2010), in which the concurrence urged the court to adopt a rule requiring district courts to provide a rational-hypothesis instruction to the jury in circumstantial evidence cases. 2014As a result, the district court here did not abuse its 8 In support of her argument that a rational-hypothesis instruction is needed, Bell cites State v. Anderson, 784 N.W.2d 320, 340 (Minn. 2010) (Meyer, J., concurring), in which Justice Meyer expressed her support for the rational-hypothesis instruction, in cases relying on circumstantial evidence, as “essential to avert undermining the presumption of innocence and to impress upon the jury the need to reach a state of certitude of the guilt of the accused.” 24 discretion when it denied Bell’s request for a rational-hypothesis instruction on | 3 | 3 |
State v. Tscheugreen2 sentences2015Id. at 337-40 (Meyer, J., concurring); see also State v. Tscheu, 758 N.W.2d 849, 871 (Minn.2008) (Meyer, J., concurring). 2010State v. Tscheu, 758 N.W.2d 849, 869-70 (Minn.2008) (Meyer, J., concurring). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Turnipseedgreen2 sentences2015See State v. Gassler, 505 N.W.2d 62, 68 (Minn. 1993) (citing State v. Turnipseed, 297 N.W.2d 308 (Minn. 1980)). 2015The court explained that while the rational-hypothesis test is appropriate for determining the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, it “does not apply to jury instructions.” Id. | 1 | 2 |
Holland v. United Statesgreen2 sentences2008Over a century later, in Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 139-40 , 75 S.Ct. 127 , 99 L.Ed. 150 (1954), a unanimous Supreme Court determined that in circumstantial evidence cases, a jury instruction on reasonable doubt obviated the need for an additional rational hypothesis instruction. 3 The federal courts, bound by Holland, thereafter abandoned the rational hypothesis instruction and also the rational hypothesis review standard. 2008Over a century later, in Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121, 139-40 , 75 S.Ct. 127 , 99 L.Ed. 150 (1954), a unanimous Supreme Court determined that in circumstantial evidence cases, a jury instruction on reasonable doubt obviated the need for an additional rational hypothesis instruction. 3 The federal courts, bound by Holland, thereafter abandoned the rational hypothesis instruction and also the rational hypothesis review standard. | 1 | 2 |
State v. Gasslergreen1 sentence2015See State v. Gassler, 505 N.W.2d 62, 68 (Minn. 1993) (citing State v. Turnipseed, 297 N.W.2d 308 (Minn. 1980)). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Richard William Francisco, United States of America v. Melvin Leroy Franciscogreen2 sentences2008E.g., United States v. Francisco, 410 F.2d 1283, 1286 (8th Cir.1969) (abandoning rational hypothesis appellate review standard). 2008E.g., United States v. Francisco, 410 F.2d 1283, 1286 (8th Cir.1969) (abandoning rational hypothesis appellate review standard). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Minnesota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
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.