Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Garcia, 302 N.W.2d 643.

295 citing documents.

State v. Watts 413 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Watts 413 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Dircks 412 N.W.2d 765 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Dircks 412 N.W.2d 765 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(court properly refused to rely on negotiated sentence term as a factor in departure); (improper to consider plea bargain as aggravating factor).
State v. Strommen 411 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Strommen 411 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.D.
State v. Gunderson 407 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Gunderson 407 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Pendzimas, d at 249 ; pet.
State v. Gaines 408 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Gaines 408 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The trial court has broad discretion in deciding whether to depart from the sentencing guidelines, but such a decision must be supported by “substantial and compelling” circumstances.
State v. Lindberg 408 N.W.2d 589 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Lindberg 408 N.W.2d 589 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Joslin 406 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Joslin 406 N.W.2d 99 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Doughman 404 N.W.2d 867 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Doughman 404 N.W.2d 867 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The trial court has discretion to depart if the offense involves “substantial and compelling circumstances.”
State v. Franson 403 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Franson 403 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Schroeder 401 N.W.2d 671 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Schroeder 401 N.W.2d 671 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
When substantial and compelling factors are present, a sentencing judge may “impose a sentence that is deemed to be more appropriate, reasonable, or equitable than the presumptive sentence.” Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.D.01 comment
State v. Strodtman 399 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Strodtman 399 N.W.2d 610 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Edmison 398 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Edmison 398 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Lund 397 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Lund 397 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Anderson 388 N.W.2d 33 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Anderson 388 N.W.2d 33 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Hodges 384 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Hodges 384 N.W.2d 175 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Bottomley 384 N.W.2d 241 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Bottomley 384 N.W.2d 241 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Herme v. State 384 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Herme v. State 384 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
the Guidelines state that when substantial and compelling circumstances are present, the judge “may” depart.
State v. Titworth 381 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Titworth 381 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Stauffacher 380 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Stauffacher 380 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Pendzimas 379 N.W.2d 247 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Pendzimas 379 N.W.2d 247 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Larson 379 N.W.2d 165 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Larson 379 N.W.2d 165 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
However, the trial court has discretion to depart from the presumptive sentence when the offense involves “substantial and compelling circumstances.”
State v. Van Ruler 378 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Van Ruler 378 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
the Guidelines state that when substantial and compelling circumstances are present, the judge “may” depart.
State v. Nesler 376 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Nesler 376 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Vikeras 378 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Vikeras 378 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Headbird v. State 375 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Headbird v. State 375 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
the Guidelines state that when substantial and compelling circumstances are present, the judge “may” depart.