may not be cited except as provided by
Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (1996).
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
State of Minnesota,
Marvin James Rogers,
Filed August 5, 1997
Toussaint, Chief Judge
Itasca County District Court
File No. K496911
John J. Muhar, Itasca County Attorney, 123 Fourth Street Northeast, Grand Rapids, MN 55744 (for respondent)
John M. Stuart, State Public Defender, Ann Brom McCaughan, Assistant State Public Defender, 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Minneapolis, MN 55414 (for appellant)
Considered and decided by Peterson, Presiding Judge, Toussaint, Chief Judge, and Amundson, Judge.
Appellant Marvin Rogers challenges his convictions of driving under the influence and driving after cancellation, alleging the evidence was insufficient to convict him. Because we find there was sufficient evidence to support the convictions, we affirm.
State v. Webb, 440 N.W.2d 426, 430 (Minn. 1989) (citing State v. Martin, 293 N.W.2d 54, 55 (Minn. 1980)). A reviewing court must assume "the jury believed the state's witnesses and disbelieved any evidence to the contrary." State v. Moore, 438 N.W.2d 101, 108 (Minn. 1989).
Appellant Marvin Rogers argues that the jury erroneously relied on his confession alone because the state provided no corroborating testimony. Under Minn. Stat. § 634.03 (1996), a confession by a defendant is insufficient to warrant conviction absent evidence that the offense has been committed. Rogers contends that the state did not present corroborating evidence that he was driving the car when the accident occurred. The record does not support Rogers's contentions.
At trial, Rogers' friend, Trevor Larson, testified that he was asleep in the passenger seat when the accident occurred and Rogers was driving. Neighborhood resident Donald Nelson testified that when he left his home to go outside he could see a person with minor bleeding seated behind the steering wheel. The evidence indicates that Larson was bleeding profusely when taken to the hospital, yet Rogers suffered only minor cuts and scrapes and was no longer bleeding by the time he arrived at the hospital.
Rogers argues that Larson was biased and would lie to protect himself from trouble. Credibility determinations are for the fact-finder. See State v. Engholm, 290 N.W.2d 780, 784 (Minn. 1980) (it is province of jury to determine credibility and weight given to testimony of any individual witness). The jury obviously found Larson and Nelson to be credible and, when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the conviction, we conclude that there is sufficient evidence to support Rogers's convictions.