Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Kindem, 313 N.W.2d 6.

754 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Da’Monte Si’Quan Lewis-Meghie Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Appellate courts “generally will not interfere with a [district] court’s decision to impose a term within the presumptive sentence range,” and will reverse a district court’s refusal to depart only in a “rare case,”
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Alexander Albert Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. James Tyrone Woods Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Appellate courts “generally will not interfere with a [district] court’s decision to impose a term within the presumptive sentence range,” and will reverse a district court’s refusal to depart only in a “rare case,”
State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Aaron Zeon Minn. Ct. App. 2026
see also Minn. Sent’g Guidelines cmt.
State of Minnesota v. Vontrez Trevon Phelps Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Gerald Bloom Minn. Ct. App. 2026
see also Minn. Sent’g Guidelines cmt.
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Franklin Knoop Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“But the mere fact that a mitigating factor is present in a particular case 7 does not obligate the court to place [a] defendant on probation[.]” (quotation omitted); (“[W]hen substantial and compelling circumstances are present, the judge may depart.” (quotation omitted) (emphasis added)).
State of Minnesota v. Brandon Bradley Hammond Minn. Ct. App. 2026
We will reverse a district court’s imposition of a presumptive sentence only in a “rare case.”
State of Minnesota v. Victor Wade Wang Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Kelsey Marie Rutland Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Phia Vang Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Justin Taylor Eschenbacher Minn. Ct. App. 2026
In other words, a district court’s refusal to depart from the presumptive sentence would warrant reversal only in a “rare case.”
State of Minnesota v. Misti Dawn Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Donald Arthur Merrill Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. John Raymond Evers Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Jeffery Lee Niemi Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Ryan Richard Fenske Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Randal Darrell Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Bruce Alvin Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Robert Kappon Evans Minn. Ct. App. 2026
A sentence within the guidelines range will be reversed only in a “rare case.”
State of Minnesota v. Donald Arthur Zawchenuk Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Ricky Allen Severtson Minn. Ct. App. 2026
See State v. Kindem , (stating that, “while there may have been arguments for departing downward,” the decision to depart is discretionary).
State of Minnesota v. Roger Lee Voss, III Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Roger Lee Voss, III Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Dayonne Marquis Lachapelle Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Dayonne Marquis Lachapelle Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Cherry Lynn Osborne Minn. Ct. App. 2026
A district court’s refusal to depart from the presumptive sentence would warrant reversal only in a “rare case.”
State of Minnesota v. Irineo Ricardo-Cosme Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Irineo Ricardo-Cosme Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(stating that, “while there 6 may have been arguments for departing downward,” the decision to depart is discretionary).
State of Minnesota v. DeAngelo Cortez Ransom Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. DeAngelo Cortez Ransom Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Appellate courts “generally will not interfere with a sentencing court’s decision to impose a term within the presumptive sentence range.” (explaining that “it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of [a] refusal to depart”).
State of Minnesota v. Tyler James Kennedy Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Tyler James Kennedy Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Brandon Lee Gardas Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Philip Kofi Itoka Minn. Ct. App. 2025
We review a district court’s decision to impose a presumptive guidelines sentence for an abuse of discretion and will reverse that decision “[o]nly in a ‘rare’ case.” ().
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Aaron Fierro Minn. Ct. App. 2025
We review a district court’s decision to impose a presumptive sentence for an abuse of discretion and will reverse that decision “[o]nly in a ‘rare’ case.” ().
State of Minnesota v. Jermaine Louis Fleming Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Jermaine Louis Fleming Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Isaac Gutierrez Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Isaac Gutierrez Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. David Choe Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(holding that appellate courts will rarely disturb a district court’s refusal to depart).
State of Minnesota v. Bounhom NA Minn. Ct. App. 2025
See State v. Kindem , (stating that “while there may have been arguments for departing downward,” the decision to depart is discretionary).
State of Minnesota v. Lindsay Marilyn Mayry Minn. Ct. App. 2025
We review a district court’s decision to impose a presumptive sentence for a clear abuse of discretion and will reverse that decision “[o]nly in a ‘rare’ case.” ().
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Gene Hoberg Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Because this is not the “rare case” requir ing reversal, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Hoberg’s request for a downward durational departure.
State of Minnesota v. Shawn Allen Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2025
We review a district court’s decision to impose a presumptive sentence for a clear abuse of discretion and will reverse that decision “[o] nly in a ‘rare’ case.” (quoting State v. Kindem , ).
State of Minnesota v. Mark Anthony Ryan Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Ashir Hassan Kimbrough Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Larry Eddie Konah Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Win Naing Aung Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Mark Noe Rios Minn. Ct. App. 2025
A district court’s refusal to depart is reversed only in a “rare case.”