Sufficiency of the evidence in 1st degree assault conviction

Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove that defendant intentionally caused great bodily harm to  a young child in her to uphold 1st degree assault conviction?

Defendant challenged her first degree assault conviction, arguing that (1) the evidence was insufficient to prove she intentionally caused great bodily harm to a young child in her care; (2) the trial court abused its discretion by admitting testimony and photographs regarding the child’s injury and recovery; and (3) defense counsel was ineffective by failing to seek a Frey-Mack hearing or retain a biomechanical engineer expert witness.  The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that evidence that the infant’s traumatic brain injury occurred while he was in the defendant’s sole care, that minor bumps and traumas the infant experienced in the hours before he was in defendant’s care did not cause his injury, and that his severe brain injury was not caused by a stroke or other metabolic condition was sufficient to support defendant’s conviction.  Affirmed.

State v. Grimm, A17-1518, Dakota County.

Minnesota Criminal Defense Lawyer Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,

DISCLAIMER: Throughout this website, there are statements on various laws. Please note that this is not legal advice, and no reliance should be taken thereon, and an attorney client relationship is not established hereby. Further, please note that these legal statements may not currently be up to date, because the laws can change daily, and this website does not. Thus, you will always need to actually retain a lawyer to establish an attorney client relationship, to rely upon any advice, and to obtain up-to-date legal research. Thank you.