Posts made in October, 2012

Standard of review for convictions based on circumstantial evidence

Standard of review for convictions based on circumstantial evidence

Contrary to what a portion of the public believes, circumstantial evidence is admissible and can be used to prove a party’s case.  When circumstantial evidence forms the basis for a conviction, a reviewing court will engage in a two-part analysis in addressing the sufficiency of the circumstantial evidence.  The components of this analysis were reviewed recently by the Minnesota Supreme Court, State v. Hurd, A11-1057 (Minn. August 8,...

Read More

Applying the harmless error standard when constitutional rights are affected

Applying the harmless error standard when constitutional rights are affected

In order to constitute reversible error, the admission of evidence must be an abuse of the trial court’s discretion and must affect a substantial right of a party.  See Minnesota Rule of Evidence 103(a). The latter part of this analysis, the harmless error rule, is often relied upon by an appellate court to avoid reversal of a lower court’s ruling.  To determine whether a constitutional error regarding the admission of...

Read More