Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Eaton, 292 N.W.2d 260.
- State v. Lámar 474 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
-
State v. Lamar
474 N.W.2d 1
Minn. Ct. App. 1991
(a sentence will stand “if the trial court’s discretion has been properly exercised” and is statutorily authorized).
-
State v. Lámar
474 N.W.2d 1
Minn. Ct. App. 1991
(a sentence will stand "if the trial court's discretion has been properly exercised" and is statutorily authorized).
- State v. Secrest 437 N.W.2d 683 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- State v. Secrest 437 N.W.2d 683 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
- State v. O'BRIEN 429 N.W.2d 293 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
-
State v. O'BRIEN
429 N.W.2d 293
Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Similarly, the defendant argued that he had one large plan, which was to swindle as much as possible.
- State v. Williams 396 N.W.2d 840 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
-
State v. Williams
396 N.W.2d 840
Minn. Ct. App. 1986
the defendants were both convicted of theft by swindle and securities *845 fraud.
- Walker v. State 394 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- Walker v. State 394 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Chidester 380 N.W.2d 595 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Chidester 380 N.W.2d 595 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
- State v. Hathaway 379 N.W.2d 498 Minn. 1985
-
State v. Hathaway
379 N.W.2d 498
Minn. 1985
-66 (Minn.1980); -32 (Minn.1978); State v. Swenson, 301 Minn. 199, 201-02
- State v. Moore 340 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1983
- State v. Moore 340 N.W.2d 671 Minn. 1983
- State v. Lalli 338 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1983
- State v. Lalli 338 N.W.2d 419 Minn. 1983
- State v. Kirsch 338 N.W.2d 45 Minn. 1983
-
State v. Kirsch
338 N.W.2d 45
Minn. 1983
§ 609.035 (1982), and State v. Gamelgard, 287 Minn. 74
- State v. Loebach 310 N.W.2d 58 Minn. 1981
-
State v. Loebach
310 N.W.2d 58
Minn. 1981
297 Minn. at 24 , d at 911 ; State v. Flowers, 262 Minn. 164
- State v. Stith 292 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1980
- State v. Stith 292 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1980