Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Marquetti, 322 N.W.2d 316.

61 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“The State bears the burden of proof at sentencing to show that a prior conviction qualifies for inclusion within the criminal - history score.” Williams v. State , 910 N .W.2d 736, 740 (Minn. 2018) ().
Williams v. State 910 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 2018
Williams v. State 910 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 2018
State v. Marquetti , , 319 (Minn. 1982).
A16-1527 Minn. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Edwards 900 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Edwards 900 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(holding that, in order to include a foreign conviction in a defendant’s criminal history score, the prosecutor must show the defendant “would have been prosecuted as an adult in Minnesota under the same circumstances”); Minn. Sent.
State v. Oberg 627 N.W.2d 721 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Oberg 627 N.W.2d 721 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
Although the state has the burden of establishing a defendant’s criminal history score under the sentencing guidelines, it is the trial court’s role to resolve any factual dispute bearing on the defendant’s criminal history score.
State v. Reece 625 N.W.2d 822 Minn. 2001
State v. Reece 625 N.W.2d 822 Minn. 2001
In support of the sentencing court’s actions, Reece, contends on appeal that the burden was on the state to establish that, had his 1978 Texas offense occurred in Minnesota, he would have been tried as an adult and that the state failed to meet this burden.
State v. Whittaker 568 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1997
State v. Whittaker 568 N.W.2d 440 Minn. 1997
State v. Peterson 530 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Peterson 530 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
at 761 ; (holding that the state has the burden of proof in establishing a defendant’s criminal history score for Sentencing Guidelines purposes).
Hill v. State 483 N.W.2d 57 Minn. 1992
Hill v. State 483 N.W.2d 57 Minn. 1992
(“generally” the trial court need only determine if the out-of-state conviction was for an offense that “corresponds” to an offense in Minnesota); (defendant was convicted in Cuba when he was 16 of burglary based on his stealing a chicken; held, state, which had burden of proof at sentencing hearing, failed to establish that defendant would have been prosecuted as an adult in Minnesota under the same circumstances and therefore sentencing court
State v. Hayes 456 N.W.2d 275 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
State v. Hayes 456 N.W.2d 275 Minn. Ct. App. 1990
State v. Nordby 448 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Nordby 448 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Stutelberg 435 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Stutelberg 435 N.W.2d 632 Minn. Ct. App. 1989
State v. Strom 430 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Strom 430 N.W.2d 860 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
(the state has the burden of proof in establishing defendants’ criminal histories for sentencing guidelines purposes).
State v. Marshall 411 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Marshall 411 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Goff 402 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Goff 402 N.W.2d 625 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Laughnan v. State 404 N.W.2d 326 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Laughnan v. State 404 N.W.2d 326 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
See, State v. Caron, 300 Minn. 123, 127
State v. Cobb 403 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Cobb 403 N.W.2d 329 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Campa 399 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Campa 399 N.W.2d 160 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
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II.B.5; -19 (Minn.1982).
State v. Casady 392 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Casady 392 N.W.2d 629 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
West v. State 390 N.W.2d 368 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
West v. State 390 N.W.2d 368 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Edmison 379 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1985
State v. Edmison 379 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1985
(state has the burden of proof in establishing a defendant’s criminal history for Sentencing Guidelines purposes).
State v. Thomas 374 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Thomas 374 N.W.2d 586 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Yanez 373 N.W.2d 640 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Yanez 373 N.W.2d 640 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.B.5; -19 (Minn.1982).
State v. Buschkopf 373 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1985
State v. Buschkopf 373 N.W.2d 756 Minn. 1985
In Webber, however, we deemed admissible weapons not used in the commission of the crime but which were otherwise probative.
State v. Wright 371 N.W.2d 238 Minn. Ct. App. 1985