Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Schantzen, 308 N.W.2d 484.
- State v. Carr 361 N.W.2d 397 Minn. 1985
-
State v. Carr
361 N.W.2d 397
Minn. 1985
we stated that the fact that drugs were taken in an aggravated robbery would not distinguish the robbery from the typical aggravated robbery.
- State v. Rohda 358 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1984
- State v. Rohda 358 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1984
- State v. Anderson 356 N.W.2d 453 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
- State v. Anderson 356 N.W.2d 453 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
- State v. Winchell 352 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
- State v. Winchell 352 N.W.2d 447 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
- State v. Malinski 353 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
- State v. Malinski 353 N.W.2d 207 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
- State v. Higginbotham 348 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1984
- State v. Higginbotham 348 N.W.2d 327 Minn. 1984
- State v. Cox 343 N.W.2d 641 Minn. 1984
-
State v. Cox
343 N.W.2d 641
Minn. 1984
This conduct was a form of gratuitous cruelty which was unjustified within the context of the crime, (robbery of drugstore).
- State v. Magnan 328 N.W.2d 147 Minn. 1983
- State v. Magnan 328 N.W.2d 147 Minn. 1983
- State v. Norton 328 N.W.2d 142 Minn. 1982
-
State v. Norton
328 N.W.2d 142
Minn. 1982
The cruelty here was “of a kind not usually associated with the commission of the offense in question.”
- State v. Martinez 319 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1982
- State v. Martinez 319 N.W.2d 699 Minn. 1982
- State v. Schantzen 316 N.W.2d 20 Minn. 1982
-
State v. Schantzen
316 N.W.2d 20
Minn. 1982
Following the trial court’s imposition of a 20-year maximum prison term, we considered defendant’s (remanded for resentencing).
- State v. Evans 311 N.W.2d 481 Minn. 1981
-
State v. Evans
311 N.W.2d 481
Minn. 1981
we discussed the problem of the length of sentence to be imposed when a departure from the presumptive sentence was proper.
- STATE, CTY. OF HENNEPIN v. McClay 310 N.W.2d 683 Minn. 1981
-
STATE, CTY. OF HENNEPIN v. McClay
310 N.W.2d 683
Minn. 1981
we held that gratuitous spraying of handcuffed robbery victims with mace constituted “particular cruelty” justifying departure.