Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
Riley v. State

116 Citing cases

  1. Riley v. State

    819 N.W.2d 162 (Minn. 2012)   Cited 321 times
    Holding that a district court abuses its discretion when its decision is "based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record"

    4 (2010). Riley v. State (Riley II), 792 N.W.2d 831, 834 (2011). In his first postconviction petition, Riley alleged: (1) the indictment violated the Double Jeopardy Clause of the United States Constitution, Minn.Stat. § 609.04, subd. 1 (2010) (prohibition on conviction for a lesser-included offense), and Minn.Stat. § 609.035 (2010) (single behavioral-incident rule); (2) his arrest was not supported by probable cause; (3) there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict; (4) the testimony of the ballistics expert should have been excluded under the rules of evidence; and (5) the district court erred in admitting hearsay evidence unsupported by corroboration or other physical evidence.

  2. State v. Hernandez

    No. A17-0187 (Minn. Ct. App. Sep. 24, 2018)   Cited 1 times

    An abuse of discretion occurs when a court's decision is based on an incorrect view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record. Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011).

  3. State v. Currin

    974 N.W.2d 567 (Minn. 2022)   Cited 8 times
    In Currin we held that, based on the plain language of the restitution statute, "a district court must consider the value of economic benefits, if any, the defendant conferred on the victim as a result of the offense when determining 'the amount of economic loss sustained by the victim as a result of the offense.'" 974 N.W.2d at 573 (citing Minn. Stat. § 611A.045, subd. (1)(a)(1)).

    "A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record." Riley v. State , 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011). "We will not reverse findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous ...."

  4. State v. Gofan

    No. A23-0832 (Minn. Ct. App. May. 20, 2024)

    A district court abuses its discretion when its decision is contrary to law or against logic and the facts on record. Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011). A district court generally does not abuse its discretion when it imposes a sentence within the presumptive guidelines range.

  5. Ramey v. State

    No. A23-0469 (Minn. Ct. App. Sep. 5, 2023)

    A postconviction court abuses its discretion when its "decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record." Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011).

  6. Michuda v. State

    No. A22-1383 (Minn. Ct. App. Mar. 27, 2023)

    Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011).

  7. State v. Taylor

    A19-2050 (Minn. Ct. App. Jun. 15, 2020)

    "A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record." Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011). But "whether an item meets the statutory requirements for restitution" is a question of law that is "fully reviewable by the appellate court."

  8. State v. E. M. L.

    No. A14-1405 (Minn. Ct. App. May. 11, 2015)

    "A [district] court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record." Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011). We will not set aside a district court's findings of fact unless they are clearly erroneous.

  9. State v. Banks

    A14-0104 (Minn. Ct. App. Feb. 9, 2015)

    "A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record." Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011). Banks moved to admit evidence that M.Y. sexually abused G.C. to show that G.C. had an alternative source of sexual knowledge.

  10. State v. Mohamed

    A11-1993 (Minn. Ct. App. Aug. 27, 2012)

    "A court abuses its discretion when its decision is based on an erroneous view of the law or is against logic and the facts in the record." Riley v. State, 792 N.W.2d 831, 833 (Minn. 2011). On appeal, the appellant has the burden of establishing that the trial court abused its discretion and that the appellant was thereby prejudiced.