Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Lindsey, 314 N.W.2d 823.
- State v. Roy 928 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2019
- State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
- State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
- Jerome Deon Nunn v. State of Minnesota 868 N.W.2d 230 Minn. 2015
-
Jerome Deon Nunn v. State of Minnesota
868 N.W.2d 230
Minn. 2015
Second, we have interpreted the phrase “executed according to the guidelines” in section II.F.2 simply to require that the sentence for the most severe current conviction “be executed and not stayed.”
- State v. Chaklos 528 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1995
-
State v. Chaklos
528 N.W.2d 225
Minn. 1995
(the phrase “executed according to the guidelines” means “when the sentence for the most severe current conviction is, according to the guidelines, required to be executed, and not stayed”).
- State v. Anderson 520 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
- State v. Anderson 520 N.W.2d 184 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
- State v. Rasinski 472 N.W.2d 645 Minn. 1991
-
State v. Rasinski
472 N.W.2d 645
Minn. 1991
3 .The parties agree that the imposition of consecutive stayed sentences constituted a departure here because, although defendant was “convicted of multiple current felonies against different persons,” his first sentence was stayed and therefore not “executed according to the guidelines.” See Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.F.
- State v. Rasinski 464 N.W.2d 517 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
-
State v. Rasinski
464 N.W.2d 517
Minn. Ct. App. 1991
The sentence for criminal vehicular operation was not “executed according to the guidelines,”
- State v. Anderson 463 N.W.2d 551 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
-
State v. Anderson
463 N.W.2d 551
Minn. Ct. App. 1990
The sentence for first degree assault has been “executed according to the guidelines,”
- State ex rel. Linehan v. Wood 394 N.W.2d 152 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
- State v. O'BRIEN 369 N.W.2d 525 Minn. 1985
-
State v. O'BRIEN
369 N.W.2d 525
Minn. 1985
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II.D.2.b(3) (1984) (it is an aggravating factor if “[t]he current conviction is for an offense in which the victim was injured and there is a prior felony conviction for an offense in which the victim was injured”)
- State v. Peake 366 N.W.2d 299 Minn. 1985
-
State v. Peake
366 N.W.2d 299
Minn. 1985
this court upheld the use of section II.D.2.b.3 in the case of a defendant convicted of aggravated robbery who had a previous manslaughter conviction.
- State v. O'BRIEN 364 N.W.2d 901 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- State v. Kennedy 363 N.W.2d 863 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- State v. Kennedy 363 N.W.2d 863 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
- State v. Vaughn 361 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1985
- State v. Vaughn 361 N.W.2d 54 Minn. 1985
- State v. Mattson 356 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
-
State v. Mattson
356 N.W.2d 391
Minn. Ct. App. 1984
the court said: The record does not reflect whether defendant was held in jail pending trial pursuant to a revocation of parole or because he failed to post bail on the present charges.
- State v. Turcotte 348 N.W.2d 110 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
-
State v. Turcotte
348 N.W.2d 110
Minn. Ct. App. 1984
which affirmed the trial court’s upward departure in a sentence for aggravated robbery involving in *112 jury to the victim.
- State v. Kennedy 342 N.W.2d 631 Minn. 1984
-
State v. Kennedy
342 N.W.2d 631
Minn. 1984
Cases supporting the sentence include: -25 (Minn.1982).
- State v. Filippi 335 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1983
-
State v. Filippi
335 N.W.2d 739
Minn. 1983
State v. *745 Lindsey, (allowing use of consecutive sentencing under section II.F.2.
- State v. Bentley 329 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1983
-
State v. Bentley
329 N.W.2d 39
Minn. 1983
supports this implicit concession and supports the view that defendant is not entitled to credit for time spent in prison in North Dakota before he was paroled to Minnesota authorities.
- State v. Freyer 328 N.W.2d 140 Minn. 1982
- State v. Freyer 328 N.W.2d 140 Minn. 1982