Cited by

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

173 citing documents.

State v. Gunderson 407 N.W.2d 143 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
-81 (Minn.1981) (where a trial court sentenced a defendant for multiple offenses on the same day, the court properly considered the first two convictions in determining defendant’s criminal history score for a third conviction, where each offense met specified criteria).
State v. Brown 406 N.W.2d 530 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Brown 406 N.W.2d 530 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
appellant’s criminal history score could be increased as each sentence was imposed.
State v. Perez 404 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Perez 404 N.W.2d 834 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
The court sentenced appellant to concurrent sentences totalling 162 months, for aggravated robbery, Minn. Stat. § 609.245 (1984), and first degree criminal sexual conduct, Minn.Stat.
State v. Litzinger 394 N.W.2d 803 Minn. 1986
State v. Litzinger 394 N.W.2d 803 Minn. 1986
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II.B.101 (1986).
Walker v. State 394 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Walker v. State 394 N.W.2d 192 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Litzinger 391 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Litzinger 391 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
it is ludicrous that the maximum sentence he could receive under the Sentencing Guidelines is 41 months.
State v. Vogel 385 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Vogel 385 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Vogel’s presumptive sentences, were two stayed sentences of 1 year and 1 day, and three stayed sentences of 13 months, 15 months and 17 months.
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
*80 held where an offender is sentenced on the same day for multiple offenses which were not part of a single behavioral incident, a trial court may increase the defendant’s criminal history score by each felony sentence as it is stayed or imposed.
State v. Pickett 375 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Pickett 375 N.W.2d 105 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
(trial court has discretion to consider defendant’s other convictions when determining sentencing).
State v. Halverson 373 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Halverson 373 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
as follows: Count I. Receiving stolen property (1983 Chevrolet, stolen from Merit Chevrolet in Maplewood on August 25, 1983).
State v. Loitz 366 N.W.2d 744 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Loitz 366 N.W.2d 744 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
The sentencing court used the Hernandez method in generating criminal history scores, and departed durationally and dispositionally on the final offense from the presumptive stayed sentence of 30 months.
Williams v. State 365 N.W.2d 370 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Williams v. State 365 N.W.2d 370 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
The sentence for assault was based on an incorrect criminal history score, and the trial court reduced the assault sentence to 54 months.
Beamon v. State 364 N.W.2d 858 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Beamon v. State 364 N.W.2d 858 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Aune 363 N.W.2d 741 Minn. 1985
State v. Aune 363 N.W.2d 741 Minn. 1985
and Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II.B.101 (1983).
State v. Lone 361 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1985
State v. Lone 361 N.W.2d 854 Minn. 1985
State v. Anderson 361 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Anderson 361 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Eggert 358 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Eggert 358 N.W.2d 156 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
V Sentencing Appellant’s concurrent sentencing, resulting in a 70 month sentence for one of the convictions, using a criminal history score including two of the other convictions, is in accord with the Hernandez method, as extended to cases in which all offenses charged are against the same victim
State v. Schmidt 357 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Schmidt 357 N.W.2d 357 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
the presumptive sentences under the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines were determined as concurrent executed prison sentences of 25 months and 34 months.
State v. Pickett 358 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1984
State v. Pickett 358 N.W.2d 38 Minn. 1984
Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II.B.l.
State v. Zeigler 356 N.W.2d 736 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Zeigler 356 N.W.2d 736 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Thomas 352 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Thomas 352 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
the Minnesota Supreme Court held that the trial court, in sentencing the defendant on the same day for three separate offenses, was justified in counting two of the convictions in determining the appropriate sentence for the third.
State v. McLemore 351 N.W.2d 927 Minn. 1984
State v. McLemore 351 N.W.2d 927 Minn. 1984
The trial court used the Hernandez method in computing defendant’s criminal history score, and Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines and Commentary II.B.101 (1982), which gave defendant criminal history scores of two for the first offense sentenced, three for the second, and four for the third.
State v. Jackson 351 N.W.2d 352 Minn. 1984
State v. Jackson 351 N.W.2d 352 Minn. 1984
if the convictions had been for offenses not arising out of the same behavioral incident or course of conduct, sentencing for the later-committed offenses can take into account the earlier-committed offenses for computation of the criminal history score.
State v. Roesch 349 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Roesch 349 N.W.2d 348 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
“The Hernandez method of applying defendant’s criminal history score may be used only when sentencing concurrently.”
State v. Wallner 346 N.W.2d 349 Minn. 1984
State v. Wallner 346 N.W.2d 349 Minn. 1984
at a time when Comment II.B.101 provided that “in order for prior convictions to be used in computing criminal history score, the sentence for the prior offense must have been stayed or imposed before the date of sentencing for the current offense.” In Hernandez , we held that the trial court in that case
State v. Wittig 343 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1984