Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Morris, 160 N.W.2d 715.

30 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Cf. State v. Koonsman , (concluding 8 kidnapping and sexual misconduct part of same behavioral incident where defendant kidnapped child with purpose of committing an act of sexual misconduct); –18 (Minn. 1968) (concluding indecent assault and kidnapping part of same behavioral incident where defendant removed victim 100 feet away from street so that he could assault her); State v. Frank , (concluding that repeated assaults were “a means to” perpetrate “contempla
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
–86 (Minn. 1989); d 517, 521–22 (Minn. 1966).
State v. Juarez 837 N.W.2d 473 Minn. 2013
State v. Juarez 837 N.W.2d 473 Minn. 2013
(citing State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119 , ).
State v. Skipintheday 717 N.W.2d 423 Minn. 2006
State v. Skipintheday 717 N.W.2d 423 Minn. 2006
See State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 123 , (stating that Minn.Stat.
State v. Kebaso 713 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 2006
State v. Kebaso 713 N.W.2d 317 Minn. 2006
We have stated that section 609.035 contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the “most serious” of the offenses arising out of a single behavioral incident because “imposing up to the maximum punishment for the most serious offense will include punishment for all offenses.” State v. Johnson, 273 Minn. 394, 399 , see also State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 123
State v. Welch 675 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 2004
State v. Welch 675 N.W.2d 615 Minn. 2004
This conclusion also embraces the reasoning and concerns set forth in our established precedent that kidnapping convictions may unfairly exaggerate “the criminality of a defendant’s conduct in those cases where the confinement was completely incidental to the crime committed during the course of kidnapping.” see also State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 128-24
State v. Smith 669 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 2003
State v. Smith 669 N.W.2d 19 Minn. 2003
We first enunciated the scope of confinement or removal necessary to support a kidnapping conviction in State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119
Neal v. State 658 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2003
Neal v. State 658 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2003
*547 In State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 122-23 , -18 (1968), we interpreted the kidnapping statute and concluded that the legislature purposefully omitted any references to time or distance, and that “limited confinement and restraint” is enough to establish the crime of kidnapping.
State v. Budreau 641 N.W.2d 919 Minn. 2002
State v. Budreau 641 N.W.2d 919 Minn. 2002
See State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 122-23 , -18 (1968) (holding that limited confinement or removal of a short distance can constitute kidnapping).
State v. Tovar 605 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 2000
State v. Tovar 605 N.W.2d 717 Minn. 2000
See State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 123-24
Dunn v. State 486 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 1992
Dunn v. State 486 N.W.2d 428 Minn. 1992
See State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 121
State v. Crocker 409 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1987
State v. Crocker 409 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1987
This decision is inconsistent with our decision in State v. Moms, 281 Minn. 119
State v. Crocker 403 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Crocker 403 N.W.2d 277 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119 , pet.
State v. Dooley 380 N.W.2d 582 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Dooley 380 N.W.2d 582 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 123-24
State v. McEwan 265 N.W.2d 818 Minn. 1978
State v. McEwan 265 N.W.2d 818 Minn. 1978
As this court stated in State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119, 124 , : “ * * * If under some circumstances the statutory penalty [for kidnapping] is unduly harsh, it is the duty of the prosecutor, the court, and the correctional authorities to modify the charge, the sentence, or the period of confinement so that it will be commensurate with the gravity
State v. Watts 208 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1973
State v. Watts 208 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1973
rovides in part as follows: “Whoever, for any of the following purposes, confines or removes from one place to another, any person without his consent * * * is guilty of kidnapping and may be sentenced as provided in subdivision 2: ***** (2) To facilitate commission of any felony or flight thereafter; or (3) To commit great bodily harm or to terrorize the victim or another * * In State v. Morris, 281 Minn. 119 , we held that it is not necessary under § 609.25, subd.