State v. Jaros
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
THISSEN, Justice.
Appellant Michael Paul Valentine Jaros challenges his conviction of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and false imprisonment, arguing that he was deprived of a fair trial when a detective improperly testified about photographs that were found on Jaros's cellphone. The district court denied Jaros's motion for a mistrial after the detective's testimony. We affirm.
FACTS
On June 11, 2016, T.H. attended a street dance in Fergus Falls. T.H. was sitting at a picnic table with T.F., whom she had met the previous night, when appellant Michael Jaros and his girlfriend Stephanie…
2Cases cited21 opinions
- State v. PostSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- State v. BolteSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
- State v. MahkukSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- State v. NessSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
- State v. HollidaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2008
16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- State of Minnesota v. Adam Taylor FravelSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Frank James BigbearSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- State of Minnesota v. Said Sharif MayeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2024
- State of Minnesota v. Shawn Michael TillmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2026
- State of Minnesota v. Shawn Michael TillmanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2026