Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Wright, 310 N.W.2d 461.

84 citing documents.

State v. Lewis 385 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Van Ruler 378 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Van Ruler 378 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Halverson 373 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Hemmings 360 N.W.2d 672 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Hemmings 360 N.W.2d 672 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Case 350 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Case 350 N.W.2d 473 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Kinsky 348 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1984
State v. Kinsky 348 N.W.2d 319 Minn. 1984
“[A] sentencing court may stay execution of a presumptively executed sentence if the facts indicate that the defendant is particularly amenable to treatment in a probationary setting.”
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. Pickett 343 N.W.2d 670 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Pickett 343 N.W.2d 670 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Feinstein 338 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1983
State v. Heywood 338 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 1983
State v. Feinstein 338 N.W.2d 244 Minn. 1983
State v. Heywood 338 N.W.2d 243 Minn. 1983
Similarly, we approved reliance on the particular amenability of a defendant to probation as a basis for a dispositional departure in the form of a stay of the presumptively executed sentence.
State v. King 337 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 1983
State v. King 337 N.W.2d 674 Minn. 1983
State v. Nelson 329 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 1983
State v. Nelson 329 N.W.2d 827 Minn. 1983
State v. Clemmer 328 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1983
State v. Clemmer 328 N.W.2d 739 Minn. 1983
State v. Hennessy 328 N.W.2d 442 Minn. 1983
State v. Bentley 329 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1983
State v. Hennessy 328 N.W.2d 442 Minn. 1983
State v. Bentley 329 N.W.2d 39 Minn. 1983
State v. Brusven 327 N.W.2d 591 Minn. 1982
State v. Brusven 327 N.W.2d 591 Minn. 1982
State v. Kraft 326 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1982
State v. Kraft 326 N.W.2d 840 Minn. 1982
State v. Trog 323 N.W.2d 28 Minn. 1982
State v. Trog 323 N.W.2d 28 Minn. 1982