Cited by

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

754 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Donald Beulah Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dionte Gosa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Although a court may depart from the guidelines when substantial and compelling circumstances are present, “it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.” (concluding in a case where the district court did not depart where there were arguments for departure “the determination whether or not to depart was clearly a discretionary decision”).
State of Minnesota v. Donald Kalib John Nichols Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Donald Kalib John Nichols Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Duane Meredith Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Allen Maurice Moffett Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Duane Meredith Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Allen Maurice Moffett Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. David Arthur Barnes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Davie Eugene McCoy Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Davie Eugene McCoy Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. David Arthur Barnes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012 & 2013)
State of Minnesota v. David Alan Nielsen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. David Alan Nielsen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(“[I]t would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”).
State of Minnesota v. Doan Meshell Engel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Doan Meshell Engel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Morgan Lee Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Morgan Lee Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Rico Patrick Howard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Alvin Hennen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Charles O’Neal Darby, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Rico Patrick Howard Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Charles O’Neal Darby, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Alvin Hennen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
The supreme court has stated that “it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.” d 6, 7 (Minn. 1981).
State of Minnesota v. Charles Kenneth Redding Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Christopher Desjarlais Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Christopher Desjarlais Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Charles Kenneth Redding Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[I]t would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Andrew Swan Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Robert Dornsbach Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Zaki Mohamed Sugule Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Zaki Mohamed Sugule Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Indeed, “it would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Andrew Swan Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Robert Dornsbach Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(); (stating that “[w]e will affirm the imposition of a presumptive guidelines sentence when the record shows that the sentencing court carefully evaluated all the testimony and information
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Freeman Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Antonio Freeman Minn. Ct. App. 2016
DECISION The district court has broad discretion at sentencing, and an appellate court “generally will not interfere with the exercise of that discretion.”
State of Minnesota v. Yia Her Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Michael David Henderson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Yia Her Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[I]t would be a rare case which would warrant reversal of the refusal to depart.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael David Henderson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Steven Andre Moore Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Steven Andre Moore Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(); (stating that “[w]e will affirm the imposition of a presumptive guidelines sentence when the record shows that the sentencing court carefully evaluated all the testimony and information presented before making a determination” and th
State of Minnesota v. Charles Arthur Bell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Charles Arthur Bell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Reynolds Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Reynolds Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Sunil Vidyadhar Sapatnekar Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Krystal Elizabeth Alwin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Krystal Elizabeth Alwin Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Sunil Vidyadhar Sapatnekar Minn. Ct. App. 2015