Opinions Archive

1. The evidence at trial was sufficient to support a guilty verdict for first-degree domestic-abuse murder under Minn. Stat. § 609.185(a)(6) (2024). 2. The Sixth Amendment right to a jury under Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004), does not apply to the threshold question of whether a sentence may be imposed for an offense under Minn. Stat. § 609.035 (2024). Affirmed.

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS In re the Marriage of: Maria Bernice Dunn, petitioner, Respondent, vs. Michael Wayne Dunn, Appellant, County of Anoka, ...

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS In re Lovell Nahmor Oates, Petitioner, State of Minnesota, Respondent, vs. Lovell Nahmor Oates, Petitioner. SPECIAL ...

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS BC Seva, LLC, d/b/a Suburban Studios, et al. Relators, vs. City of Brooklyn Center, Respondent. SPECIAL TERM ORDER 1 ...

Relator Ger Xiong challenges the determination of an unemployment-law judge (ULJ) that Xiong was ineligible for unemployment benefits because he was discharged from his job for employment misconduct. Because the ULJ's decision is supported by substantial evidence, we affirm.

In this custody-modification appeal, appellant-mother challenges the district court's grant of sole physical custody to respondent-father, arguing that the district court abused its discretion by failing to conduct an in-camera interview with the child, relying on a custody-evaluation report, and not considering the impact of the custody change on the child. We affirm.

In this direct appeal from the judgment of conviction for first-degree sale of cocaine, third-degree possession of cocaine, and third-degree possession of fentanyl, appellant argues that his convictions must be reversed because law enforcement expanded the scope of an equipment-violation vehicle stop without probable cause. Because the odor of marijuana and Jacox-Mann's admission of the use of marijuana do not constitute sufficient probable cause to search a vehicle given the cannabis laws in effect at the time of the incident, we reverse and remand.

Appellant and cross-respondent Daniel Petsinger challenges the district court's final judgment granting his request for an injunction and declaratory relief but dismissing his trespass claim. Respondent and cross-appellant Jaguar Communications, LLC (also known as Metronet) challenges the district court's summary-judgment order based on its determination that Jaguar does not have a valid easement on Petsinger's land. Because the district court did not err in its determinations, we affirm in part. However, we remand for the sole purpose of allowing the district court to clarify what personal property Jaguar may remove from Petsinger's land before being enjoined from reentry.

Appellant Jamarcus Jamond Morris appeals from the final judgment of conviction for four counts of aiding and abetting attempted first-degree murder, challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to prove his identity as a masked shooter. Because the evidence is sufficient, we affirm.

This matter involves two related appeals. In the first case, appellant City of Minneapolis challenges an order denying summary judgment, contending that respondent Kimberly Lowry's claims are barred by official and vicarious immunity. In the second case, appellant Lowry challenges an order granting respondent Minneapolis Public Housing Authority and Community Housing Resources' (MPHA) motion for summary judgment on immunity grounds. Because the district court did not err in denying the city's motion for summary judgment, we affirm in part. But because the district court erred in granting MPHA's motion for summary judgment, we reverse in part. And we remand all of Lowry's claims to the district court for further proceedings.