Minnesota appeals court orders Yusuf's Medicaid fraud verdicts reinstated
The appeals court orders reinstatement of Yusuf's six theft-by-swindle verdicts. According to its opinion, the trial court had found a reasonable inference that his brother acted without his knowledge; the panel concludes that the evidence as a whole excludes that explanation.
Case period:
Published by The Dispute Index editorial teamPublished Updated
Overview
The October 26 opinion (opens in a new tab) reverses the post-verdict judgment of acquittal and remands for reinstatement of six aiding-and-abetting theft-by-swindle verdicts.
The dispute concerns knowledge and intent. A jury convicted Yusuf on six counts on August 12, 2025. On November 20, 2025, Hennepin County Judge Sarah S. West set the verdicts aside. Her order finds a reasonable inference that his brother, Mohamed Yusuf, committed the fraud without his knowledge, and faults the State for not tying Yusuf to his brother's activities. Writing for a three-judge panel, Judge Worke reviews the sufficiency of the evidence de novo. The panel agrees with both parties that the circumstantial-evidence standard governs the post-verdict motion. It concludes that the circumstances proved, considered together, make Yusuf's hypothesis that his brother concealed the fraud from him unreasonable.
Attorney General Keith Ellison (opens in a new tab) defends the evidence and the decision to appeal. The opinion is nonprecedential. It remands for reinstatement of the verdicts and does not impose a sentence.
People in this case
Keith EllisonDirectly involved
Timeline
3 timeline entries on this page. Dates: August 12, 2025 to October 26, 2026
August 2025
Jury convicts Yusuf on six theft-by-swindle counts
Incident
After a trial that began on August 4, 2025, the jury returns guilty verdicts on the six aiding-and-abetting theft-by-swindle counts. Earlier that day the court had granted acquittal on the racketeering count and denied it on the others.
[01]State v. Yusuf: district court order granting a judgment of acquittal
Judge Sarah S. West's November 20, 2025 order grants Yusuf's post-verdict motion and enters a judgment of acquittal on counts 2 to 7. Its attached memorandum sets out the trial history and her findings. The order is available through Minnesota Court Records Online under court file 27-CR-24-13734.
State v. Yusuf: district court order granting a judgment of acquittalCourt File No. 27-CR-24-13734; Order on Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, filed Nov. 20, 2025; order page and memorandum conclusion
November 2025
Judge West enters a judgment of acquittal on all six counts
Source release
Judge Sarah S. West grants Yusuf's post-verdict motion and directs entry of a judgment of acquittal on counts 2 to 7. Her memorandum finds that the evidence leaves a reasonable inference that his brother committed the fraud without his knowledge.
[01]State v. Yusuf: district court order granting a judgment of acquittal
Judge Sarah S. West's November 20, 2025 order grants Yusuf's post-verdict motion and enters a judgment of acquittal on counts 2 to 7. Its attached memorandum sets out the trial history and her findings. The order is available through Minnesota Court Records Online under court file 27-CR-24-13734.
State v. Yusuf: district court order granting a judgment of acquittalCourt File No. 27-CR-24-13734; Order on Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, filed Nov. 20, 2025; order page and memorandum conclusion
October 2026
Appeals court reverses the acquittal and remands
Source release
Reviewing the evidence de novo, the panel concludes that the circumstances proved are consistent only with guilt and orders reinstatement of the six jury verdicts.
[02]State v. Yusuf: appellate opinion reinstating the jury verdicts
The nonprecedential opinion reverses the judgment of acquittal and remands for reinstatement of six verdicts. It reproduces the competing sufficiency arguments.
State v. Yusuf: appellate opinion reinstating the jury verdictsA25-2003; opening, facts, and final sufficiency analysis
Response record
Responses
Choose one response filter, or select All responses to see the full record.
3 responses. Newest first.
Renee L. WorkeMinnesota Court of Appeals judge writing the opinion for a three-judge panelDirectly involved Before this statement
A jury returned six guilty verdicts, and the trial court later granted a judgment of acquittal. The state appealed on the ground that the evidence was sufficient.
"Because there was sufficient circumstantial evidence of respondent’s guilt, we reverse and remand for reinstatement of the jury’s verdicts."
Defended or excusedCase context: Minnesota appeals court orders Yusuf's Medicaid fraud verdicts reinstated
Full statement and sources
Worke's opinion holds that the circumstantial evidence supports the six verdicts and reverses the acquittal.
After the statement
The opinion examines the circumstantial evidence as a whole and rejects Yusuf's proposed explanation that Mohamed concealed the fraud from him.
State v. Yusuf: appellate opinion reinstating the jury verdictsA25-2003; opening, facts, and final sufficiency analysisWhy this label?
Relative to reinstating the jury's verdicts, the opinion expressly finds sufficient evidence and orders reinstatement.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Keith EllisonMinnesota attorney generalDirectly involvedBefore this statement
Ellison announces the appellate ruling and says he is pleased with the result. His office prosecuted the case and appealed the acquittal.
"we presented more than ample evidence at trial of Yusuf’s guilt"
Defended or excusedCase context: Minnesota appeals court orders Yusuf's Medicaid fraud verdicts reinstated
Full statement and sources
Ellison says the evidence justified appealing the trial court's acquittal and welcomes reinstatement of the verdicts.
After the statement
He says the fraud harmed taxpayers and people relying on home and community-based services, and welcomes the return of the guilty verdicts.
Keith Ellison responds to reinstatement of Yusuf verdictsFirst quotation by EllisonWhy this label?
Relative to reinstating the jury's verdicts, Ellison expressly defends the evidence and his office's decision to appeal.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sarah S. WestHennepin County district judge ruling on Yusuf's post-verdict motion after presiding over his trial Before this statement
The memorandum's conclusion finds a reasonable, rational inference that Yusuf owned Promise on paper while his brother committed the fraud and ran the business without his knowledge or involvement. It notes that a conviction resting on circumstantial evidence stands only if no other reasonable inference is inconsistent with guilt.
"While the Court is troubled by the manner in which fraud was able to be perpetuated at Promise, the State’s evidence did not exclude other reasonable, rational inferences that are inconsistent with Mr. Yusuf’s guilt."
CondemnedCase context: Minnesota appeals court orders Yusuf's Medicaid fraud verdicts reinstated
Full statement and sources
West concludes that the State's circumstantial evidence leaves a reasonable inference that Yusuf's brother, Mohamed Yusuf, committed the fraud without his knowledge. She finds the evidence insufficient to sustain the six aiding-and-abetting theft-by-swindle counts and grants the motion for a judgment of acquittal.
After the statement
The order then says the State overstated the fraud in its investigation and presentation and failed to tie Yusuf to his brother's activities. It finds the evidence insufficient for the six counts and grants the motion.
State v. Yusuf: district court order granting a judgment of acquittalCourt File No. 27-CR-24-13734; Order on Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, filed Nov. 20, 2025; order page and memorandum conclusionWhy this label?
Relative to reinstating the jury's verdicts, the order takes the opposite view: it finds the evidence insufficient to sustain the six counts and sets the verdicts aside. The label records opposition to the verdicts standing, not a view of the fraud itself, which the order calls troubling.
This label describes the statement's response within the context above.
Sources
(3)
Original text
State v. Yusuf: appellate opinion reinstating the jury verdicts
Relevant passage: A25-2003; opening, facts, and final sufficiency analysis
About this source
The nonprecedential opinion reverses the judgment of acquittal and remands for reinstatement of six verdicts. It reproduces the competing sufficiency arguments.
- Author
- Renee L. Worke
- Published
- Accessed
Original text
State v. Yusuf: district court order granting a judgment of acquittal
Relevant passage: Court File No. 27-CR-24-13734; Order on Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, filed Nov. 20, 2025; order page and memorandum conclusion
About this source
Judge Sarah S. West's November 20, 2025 order grants Yusuf's post-verdict motion and enters a judgment of acquittal on counts 2 to 7. Its attached memorandum sets out the trial history and her findings. The order is available through Minnesota Court Records Online under court file 27-CR-24-13734.
- Author
- Sarah S. West
- Published
- Accessed
Official statement
Keith Ellison responds to reinstatement of Yusuf verdicts
Relevant passage: First quotation by Ellison
About this source
Ellison defends the trial evidence and the appeal of the acquittal.
- Author
- Keith Ellison
- Published
- Accessed
Share or embed this case
The embed keeps its attribution link to The Dispute Index. Credit the image to The Dispute Index and link to the case page.
Cite this record
- Publisher
- The Dispute Index
- Title
- Minnesota appeals court orders Yusuf's Medicaid fraud verdicts reinstated
- First published
- Last updated
- Permalink
- https://disputeindex.com/cases/abdifatah-yusuf-fraud-verdicts-acquittal-appeal
The Dispute Index. "Minnesota appeals court orders Yusuf's Medicaid fraud verdicts reinstated". First published: 2026-10-29. Last updated: 2026-10-29. https://disputeindex.com/cases/abdifatah-yusuf-fraud-verdicts-acquittal-appeal