stating that the reason for heightened review in circumstantial evidence cases was concern over the inferences made by the jury from facts proved
How later courts described this case
- stating that the reason for heightened review in circumstantial evidence cases was concern over the inferences made by the jury from facts proved
- stating that the reason for heightened review in circumstantial-evidence cases is concern over the inferences the jury makes from facts proved
- stating that this court must identify circumstances proved “by resolving all questions of fact in favor of the jury’s verdict,” giving deference to jury’s credibility determinations
- stating that direct evidence “is based on personal knowledge or observation and . . . proves a fact without inference or presumption” (quotation omitted)
Written by the judges who cited it.
The opinion
MCKEIG, Justice
(dissenting).
I join in the dissent of Justice Lillehaug.