DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Hernandez, 311 N.W.2d 478.

173 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota v. Kyle Mitchell Hood Minn. Ct. App. 2015
    -81 (Minn. 6 1981); Minn. Sent.
  • State v. Edwards 774 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Edwards 774 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Williams 771 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Williams 771 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 2009
    We first discussed whether a defendant’s
  • State v. Williams 757 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
  • State v. Williams 757 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
  • State v. Maurstad 733 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 2007
  • State v. Maurstad 733 N.W.2d 141 Minn. 2007
  • Spann v. State 704 N.W.2d 486 Minn. 2005
  • Spann v. State 704 N.W.2d 486 Minn. 2005
  • State v. Zeimet 696 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 2005
  • State v. Zeimet 696 N.W.2d 791 Minn. 2005
    See, (stating that jail credit should not turn on matters that are subject to manipulation such as the timing of the filing of a criminal complaint); (approving a method for sentencing multiple current convictions under circumstances of the case which showed no indication of manipulation).
  • State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
    Criminal-history score Appellant argues that even if this court finds that the multiple-victim exception applies, the district court erred (1) in its calculation of his sentence, and (2) as a result of this sentence, by unfairly exaggerating the criminality of his offense.
  • State v. MONDRY 682 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. MONDRY 682 N.W.2d 183 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
    (emphasis added); (holding that, when sentencing a defendant on the same day for three convictions from separate courses of conduct, the district court properly considered the first two convictions in determining the criminal-history score for the third conviction).
  • State v. Hickman 666 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
  • State v. Hickman 666 N.W.2d 729 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
    -81 (Minn.1981) (holding that .defendant’s criminal history score may be increased for other convictions sentenced on same day that are not part of same behavioral incident).
  • State v. Woelfel 621 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Woelfel 621 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
  • State v. Schmit 601 N.W.2d 896 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Schmit 601 N.W.2d 896 Minn. 1999
    (when sentencing on the same day for multiple offenses which are not part of the same behavioral incident, the court may increase a defendant’s criminal history score as each sentence is imposed).
  • State v. Gould 562 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Soto 562 N.W.2d 299 Minn. 1997
  • State v. Soto 562 N.W.2d 299 Minn. 1997
    the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines allowed pri- or felony convictions to be used in calculating a defendant’s criminal history score only if the sentence had been stayed or imposed before the date of sentencing for the current offense.
  • State v. Gould 562 N.W.2d 518 Minn. 1997
    the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines allowed pri- or felony convictions to be used in calculating a defendant’s criminal history score only if the sentence had been stayed or imposed before the date of sentencing for the current offense.
  • State v. Murphy 545 N.W.2d 909 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Murphy 545 N.W.2d 909 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Pittel 518 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1994
  • State v. Trong Kim Huynh 519 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1994
  • State v. Pittel 518 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 1994
    Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.B.
  • State v. Trong Kim Huynh 519 N.W.2d 191 Minn. 1994
  • State v. Trong Kim Huynh 504 N.W.2d 477 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
  • State v. Trong Kim Huynh 504 N.W.2d 477 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
    (in sentencing a convicted defendant on the same day for three convictions based on different offenses not part of the same behavioral incident or course of conduct and involving different victims, the trial court could consider the first two convictions in determining the defendant’s criminal history
  • State v. Morrow 492 N.W.2d 539 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • State v. Morrow 492 N.W.2d 539 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
    the court sentenced appellant on October 24, 1991, to twenty-one months stayed on the first offense, twenty-six months stayed on the second offense, and thirty-four months executed on the third offense.
  • State v. Braun 487 N.W.2d 232 Minn. 1992
  • State v. Braun 487 N.W.2d 232 Minn. 1992
  • State v. Herrmann 479 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • State v. Herrmann 479 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
  • State v. Hartfield 459 N.W.2d 668 Minn. 1990
  • State v. Hartfield 459 N.W.2d 668 Minn. 1990
    1 . we held that under certain circumstances the trial court, in sentencing a defendant on one day for multiple offenses that were not part of a single behavioral incident and that occurred at different times and involved different victims, may properly assign one point for each felony conviction for which a
  • State v. Glidden 455 N.W.2d 744 Minn. 1990
  • State v. Glidden 455 N.W.2d 744 Minn. 1990
  • State v. Hicks 432 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Hicks 432 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
    Pursuant to the state’s motion, (providing that sentencing on same day for three convictions based on separate offenses not part of the same course of conduct involving different victims, could properly consider first two convictions when sentencing defendant on third conviction).
  • State v. O'BRIEN 429 N.W.2d 293 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. O'BRIEN 429 N.W.2d 293 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
  • State v. Gunderson 407 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1987