Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Maurstad, 733 N.W.2d 141.

237 citing documents.

State v. Washington 894 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Washington 894 N.W.2d 168 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
1 But review of a defendant’s criminal-history score may not be forfeited, “because a sentence based on an incorrect criminal history score is an illegal sen- *172 tenee.” Outlaw, d at 356 (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Greene Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Jack Warren Nomeland Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Greene Minn. Ct. App. 2017
correctable at any time.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Jack Warren Nomeland Minn. Ct. App. 2017
9, allows a court to “correct a sentence not authorized by law.” (noting that rule 27.03 allows court to sua sponte correct sentence).
State of Minnesota v. Burt Gregory Alan Stover Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Burt Gregory Alan Stover Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(noting that “a defendant may not waive review of his criminal history score calculation” and may correct his score “at any time” (quotations omitted)).
Jonathan Nicholas Turner v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Jonathan Nicholas Turner v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle 881 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Forrest Grant Noggle 881 N.W.2d 545 Minn. 2016
-47 (Minn. 2007) (“[A] defendant may not waive sentencing issues in some contexts—for example, when a particular kind of sentencing error results in an illegal sentence.” (citing Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Jacqueay Roberson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Followed State of Minnesota v. Derrick Jacqueay Roberson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Toby Earl Johnson v. State of Minnesota 877 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 2016
Toby Earl Johnson v. State of Minnesota 877 N.W.2d 776 Minn. 2016
The relief sought by Johnson plainly “implicates more than simply his 4 By contrast, the sentence corrected under Rule 27.03, subdivision 9 was to be imposed, per the terms of the plea agreement, in accordance with the apposite Minnesota sentencing guidelines.
Morris Gaye Kayee v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Morris Gaye Kayee v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(stating that “a defendant may not waive review of his criminal history score calculation”).
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Dale Senty-Haugen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Dale Senty-Haugen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Drljic 876 N.W.2d 350 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Drljic 876 N.W.2d 350 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(noting that “a defendant cannot forfeit review of [the defendant’s] criminal history score calculation”).
Antonio Medina v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Antonio Medina v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Archester Rodgers, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Archester Rodgers, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Here, Rodgers did not object to the calculation of his criminal history score, but a criminal defendant “may not waive review of his criminal history score calculation.” d 141, 147 (Minn. 2007).
State of Minnesota v. Shannon Don Quenzer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Shannon Don Quenzer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
9, correctable ‘at any time’—a defendant may not waive review of his criminal history score calculation.”
State of Minnesota v. Michael Robert Robinson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael Robert Robinson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael Devon Jarmon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Darwin Ray Battle-Bey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Darwin Ray Battle-Bey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
d 141, 147 (Minn. 2007) (stating that “a defendant may not waive review of his criminal history score calculation”).
State of Minnesota v. Michael Devon Jarmon Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Dakari Michael Coles 862 N.W.2d 477 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Dakari Michael Coles 862 N.W.2d 477 Minn. 2015
(holding that a "sentence based on an incorrect criminal history score is an illegal sentence” and is correctable at any time under Rule 27.03).
Xavier Jerome Buckhanan v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Xavier Jerome Buckhanan v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
9 (stating that the district court may at any time correct a sentence unauthorized by law); (holding that a sentence based on an incorrect criminal history score is illegal).
Jose Socorro Ortiz v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Justin Christopher Mitchell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Luis Armando Cubas Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Luis Armando Cubas Minn. Ct. App. 2015
151 (Minn. 2007) (prohibiting criminal defendant from waiving review of criminal-history-score calculation).
State of Minnesota v. Justin Christopher Mitchell Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jose Socorro Ortiz v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
ation of Minnesota Statutes section 609.04 (2006), or when the district court unlawfully stays a sentence in the face of a statute that mandates an executed sentence, or when the district court unlawfully sentences the defendant based on an incorrect criminal history score, d 141, 147 (Minn. 2007), or when the defendant’s sentence constituted an unlawful upward departure, –53 (Minn. App. 2013).
State of Minnesota v. Victor Dupree Whitehead Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Victor Dupree Whitehead Minn. Ct. App. 2014
But as the state concedes, “a defendant may not waive review of his 4 criminal history score.”
Washington v. State 845 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Washington v. State 845 N.W.2d 205 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
For example, the issue was whether an offender could challenge his sentence on the ground that the district court had "erred in assigning ...
State v. Rick 835 N.W.2d 478 Minn. 2013
State v. Rick 835 N.W.2d 478 Minn. 2013
We have recognized that when a criminal statute “is ambiguous, we construe it narrowly according to the rule of lenity.”

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by