DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Schantzen, 308 N.W.2d 484.

126 citing documents.

  • State v. Harwell 515 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    If the record supports a finding of substantial and compelling circumstances, this court will not interfere with the sentence “unless it has a ‘strong feeling’ that the sentence is disproportional to the offense.” ().
  • State v. Patterson 511 N.W.2d 476 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • State v. Patterson 511 N.W.2d 476 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
    “If the record supports findings that substantial and compelling circumstances exist,” a reviewing court will not interfere with the trial court’s discretion “unless it has a ‘strong feeling’ that the sentence is disproportional to the offense.” ().
  • State v. Stirens 506 N.W.2d 302 Minn. 1993
  • State v. Stirens 506 N.W.2d 302 Minn. 1993
    Two examples of such cases are State v. Evans, 311 ’ N.W.2d 481 (Minn.1981)
  • State v. Kimmons 502 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • State v. Kimmons 502 N.W.2d 391 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    If the record supports the trial court’s findings of substantial and compelling circumstances, a reviewing court will uphold the sentence “unless it has a ‘strong feeling’ that the sentence is disproportionate to the offense.” ().
  • State v. Herrmann 479 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • State v. Herrmann 479 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • State v. O'HAGAN 474 N.W.2d 613 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
  • State v. O'HAGAN 474 N.W.2d 613 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
    “If the record supports findings that substantial and compelling circumstances exist,” a reviewing court will not interfere with the trial court’s discretion “unless it has a ‘strong feeling’ that the sentence is disproportionate to the offense.” ().
  • State v. Anderson 463 N.W.2d 551 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Anderson 463 N.W.2d 551 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
  • State v. Schenk 427 N.W.2d 12 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Schenk 427 N.W.2d 12 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Frank 416 N.W.2d 744 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Frank 416 N.W.2d 744 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    While Frank’s sentence was 3.76 times that of the guidelines, the broad discretion of the trial court will not be disturbed unless there is a “strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds * * ⅜ the severity of the offense.”
  • State v. Horoshak 415 N.W.2d 404 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Horoshak 415 N.W.2d 404 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    The trial court is accorded broad discretion and we will not interfere absent a “strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds or is less than that ‘proportional to the severity of the offense of conviction and the extent of the offender’s criminal history.’ ” (quoting Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines, Statement of Purpose and Principles).
  • State v. Williams 414 N.W.2d 781 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Williams 414 N.W.2d 781 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    DECISION The appellate court will not modify the departure unless it has a “strong feeling” that the sentence is disproportional to the offense and “that the trial judge exceeded his discretion in assessing the sanction.” see Minn.Stat.
  • State v. Strommen 411 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Strommen 411 N.W.2d 540 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    ANALYSIS Broad discretion is accorded the sentencing court, which will not be disturbed unless there is a “strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds * * * that proportional to the severity of the offense.” ().
  • State v. Gaines 408 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Gaines 408 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Harris 407 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Harris 407 N.W.2d 456 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    See Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.D.2.b(2); (gratuitous infliction of pain qualifies as “particular cruelty”).
  • State v. Gettel 404 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
  • State v. Gettel 404 N.W.2d 902 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
    Trial courts are afforded broad discretion in departing durationally when sentencing, and absent a “strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds or is less than that ‘proportional to the severity of the offense * * ” this court will not disturb the sentence.
  • 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
    The trial court is accorded broad discretion and we will not interfere absent a “strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds or is less than that ‘proportional to the severity of the offense of conviction and the extent of the offender’s criminal history.’ ” (quoting Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines, Statement of Purpose and Principles).
  • State v. Litzinger 391 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Litzinger 391 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Staten 390 N.W.2d 914 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Sturm 391 N.W.2d 87 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Sturm 391 N.W.2d 87 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    Minn. Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II.D.
  • State v. Vogel 385 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Vogel 385 N.W.2d 35 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
    The trial court “is accorded broad discretion and we will not interfere absent a ‘strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds or is less than that proportional to the severity of the offense.’” ().
  • State v. Titworth 381 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
  • State v. Titworth 381 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
    The trial court “is accorded broad discretion and we will not interfere absent a ‘strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds or is less than that proportional to the severity of the offense.’ ” ().
  • State v. Barber 372 N.W.2d 783 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Barber 372 N.W.2d 783 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    The trial court, then, is accorded broad discretion and we will not interfere absent a “strong feeling that the sanction imposed exceeds or is less than that proportional to the severity of the offense.”
  • State v. Campbell 367 N.W.2d 454 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Campbell 367 N.W.2d 454 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Finbraaten 363 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Finbraaten 363 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 1985