Cited by

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

754 citing documents.

State v. Lewis 385 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Lewis 385 N.W.2d 352 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Herme v. State 384 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Herme v. State 384 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
the supreme court stated: [I]t would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.
State v. Lonergan 381 N.W.2d 51 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Quast 381 N.W.2d 20 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Quast 381 N.W.2d 20 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Here, there were no substantial and compelling reasons requiring departure; this is not the “rare case”
State v. Lonergan 381 N.W.2d 51 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. Lockhart 376 N.W.2d 249 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Lockhart 376 N.W.2d 249 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Headbird v. State 375 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Headbird v. State 375 N.W.2d 90 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
the Minnesota Supreme Court stated: [I]t would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.
Wakefield v. State 374 N.W.2d 781 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Wakefield v. State 374 N.W.2d 781 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Smith 374 N.W.2d 520 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Smith 374 N.W.2d 520 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Stahlberg 373 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Stahlberg 373 N.W.2d 843 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Ordinarily we will not interfere with a presumptive sentence
State v. Halverson 373 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Halverson 373 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
To the contrary the Supreme Court, states that it is a rare case which warrants interference with a presumptive sentence: Minn.Stat.
Kennedy v. State 372 N.W.2d 83 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Kennedy v. State 372 N.W.2d 83 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Irby 368 N.W.2d 19 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Irby 368 N.W.2d 19 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. King 367 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Olson 367 N.W.2d 637 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Olson 367 N.W.2d 637 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. King 367 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Williams v. State 365 N.W.2d 370 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Williams v. State 365 N.W.2d 370 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Montgomery 363 N.W.2d 869 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Theisen 363 N.W.2d 867 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Montgomery 363 N.W.2d 869 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
the Minnesota Supreme Court stated: [W]e do not intend entirely to close the door on appeals from refusals to depart.
State v. Theisen 363 N.W.2d 867 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
the Minnesota Supreme Court stated: [W]e do not intend entirely to close the door on appeals from refusals to depart.
State v. Olson 359 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Nevins 359 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Nevins 359 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Olson 359 N.W.2d 53 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Ferdelman 358 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Ferdelman 358 N.W.2d 678 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Eggert 358 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Eggert 358 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
The Supreme Court has declined to interfere with sentencing decisions involving no departure from the guidelines except in rare cases involving “compelling circumstances.”
State v. Nolder 357 N.W.2d 370 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Nolder 357 N.W.2d 370 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Farr 357 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Farr 357 N.W.2d 163 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Oka 356 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 1984
State v. Oka 356 N.W.2d 676 Minn. 1984