Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Gardner, 328 N.W.2d 159.

66 citing documents.

State v. Higginbotham 348 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1984
State v. Higginbotham 348 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1984
State v. Northard 348 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Northard 348 N.W.2d 764 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Dietz 344 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1984
State v. Dietz 344 N.W.2d 386 Minn. 1984
consecutive service, but occasionally they bear on a decision whether or not to grant a disposi-tional departure); , 58 n. 1 (Minn.1983) (defendant’s lack of remorse and trial court’s belief that a stiffer sentence was needed to deter defendant and others are not factors justifying a durational departure or one with respect to consecutive service); (defendant’s chemical dependency problem and his dangerousness are not the sort of factors which can be relied upon as justifying a durational depart
State v. Hines 343 N.W.2d 869 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Hines 343 N.W.2d 869 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Wall 343 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1984
State v. Wall 343 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1984
State v. Edwards 343 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1984
State v. Edwards 343 N.W.2d 269 Minn. 1984
However, there are exceptions, one being when the defense “opens the door,”
State v. Ott 341 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1984
State v. Ott 341 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 1984
State v. Nelson 329 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 1983
State v. Nelson 329 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 1983