Cited by

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

754 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Morgan Leslie Pavey Minn. Ct. App. 2017
A17-0222 State of Minnesota v. Emanuel Lydell Collier, and Emanuel Lydell Collier, vs. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-8 (Minn. 1981) (stating that although reasons may support departing downward, the district court is not required to depart).
State of Minnesota v. Victor Arden Barnard Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(stating that it is a rare case where an appellate court will reverse a district court’ s imposition of the presumptive sentence) .
State of Minnesota v. Alfredo Darcourt Castellanos Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Tiffany Lynn Lambert Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(“[T]he Guidelines state that when substantial and compelling circumstances are prese nt, the judge ‘may’ depart.”); -54 (Minn. App. 2011) (noting that a district court must consider the circumstances of a case when deciding whether to depart, but that the presenc
State of Minnesota v. Steven Bernard Edwards Minn. Ct. App. 2017
at 253 (d 6, 7 (Minn. 1981)).
State of Minnesota v. Brett Steven Lewis Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Brian Keith Jourdain Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Katherine Marie Kurimay Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jessten Gordon Grover Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Robert James Jacka Minn. Ct. App. 2017
And “it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”
State of Minnesota v. Robert Scott Wood Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Antonyo White Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Bielmar Alverez-Agular aka Bielmar Alvarez-Aguilar Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Hannah Christie Weyh Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jon Paul Weidenbach Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Sammy Lee Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Brad Jules Krekelberg Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jennifer Marie Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Linard Collins Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Dwayne Alan Case Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Cory James Bebeau Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Guidelines 2.D.1 ; see also S tate v. Kindem
State of Minnesota v. Kim Ronnie Blatcher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Kim Ronnie Blatcher Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael Scott Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jerry Lee Collins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael Scott Johnson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(noting that it is the “rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart”).
State of Minnesota v. Jerry Lee Collins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[I]t would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.” d 6, 7 (Minn. 1981).
State of Minnesota v. Dennis Ervin Carter Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dimitri Devonte Harrell Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Artaveus Shawntez Atkins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dimitri Devonte Harrell Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(“[I]t would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”).
State of Minnesota v. Dennis Ervin Carter Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Artaveus Shawntez Atkins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
We “will not ordinarily interfere with a sentence falling within the presumptive sentence range, either dispositionally or durationally, even if there are grounds that would justify departure.” (quotation omitted); (“[W]e believe that it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”).
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Casa Roby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Casa Roby Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tetyang Puok Juate-Yout Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tetyang Puok Juate-Yout Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Scott Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Scott Anderson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
An appellate court “will not ordinarily interfere with a sentence falling within the presumptive sentence range, either dispositionally or 2 durationally, even if there are grounds that would justify departure.” (quotation omitted); d 6, 7 (Minn. 1981) (expressing belief “that it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart”).
State of Minnesota v. Walter David Tischer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Walter David Tischer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Bailey Jordan Garcia Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Corey Michael Kokette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Corey Michael Kokette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Bailey Jordan Garcia Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Indeed, “it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”
State of Minnesota v. Ammanuel Ray Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ammanuel Ray Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dionte Gosa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Donald Beulah Minn. Ct. App. 2016

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by