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. Kebaso, 713 N.W.2d 317.

69 citing documents.

  • State of Minnesota v. Hugh Alexander Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
  • State of Minnesota v. Hugh Alexander Larson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
    to ascertain which offense is the most serious, leaving the longest sentence in place.” ( ).
  • State of Minnesota v. Don Antoine Jones 848 N.W.2d 528 Minn. 2014
  • State of Minnesota v. Don Antoine Jones 848 N.W.2d 528 Minn. 2014
    utive sentences, it is irrelevant whether multiple sentences were authorized under Minn. Stat. 6 Section 609.035, subdivision 1, contemplates that a defendant should be sentenced only for the most serious offense arising from a single course of conduct because “imposing up to the maximum punishment for the most serious offense will include punishment for all offenses.” (citations omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).
  • State v. St. John 847 N.W.2d 704 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
  • State v. St. John 847 N.W.2d 704 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
    -23 (Minn.2006) (applying de novo review in deciding whether immigration consequences were relevant to determination of which offense was most serious under section 609.035).
  • State v. Chavarria-Cruz 839 N.W.2d 515 Minn. 2013
  • State v. Ferguson 808 N.W.2d 586 Minn. 2012
  • State v. Ferguson 808 N.W.2d 586 Minn. 2012
    Section 609.035 “contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the ‘most serious’ of the offenses arising out of a single behavioral incident because ‘imposing up to the maximum punishment for the most serious offense will include punishment for all offenses.’” (quoting State v. Johnson, 273 Minn. 394, 399 , ); (same).
  • State v. Ferguson 786 N.W.2d 640 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
  • State v. Ferguson 786 N.W.2d 640 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
  • State v. Franks 765 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 2009
  • State v. Franks 765 N.W.2d 68 Minn. 2009
    We have said “that section 609.035 contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the ‘most serious’ of the offenses arising out of a single behavioral incident because ‘imposing up to the maximum punishment for the most serious offense will include punishment for all offenses.’ ” (quoting State v. Johnson, 273 Minn. 394, 399 , ).
  • State v. Jones 745 N.W.2d 845 Minn. 2008
  • State v. Jones 745 N.W.2d 845 Minn. 2008
    The statute “contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the ‘most serious’ of the offenses arising out of a single behavioral incident because ‘imposing up to the maximum punishment for the most serious offense will include punishment for all offenses.’ ” (quoting State v. Johnson, 273 Minn. 394, 399 , ).
  • State v. Franks 742 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
  • State v. Franks 742 N.W.2d 7 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
    In State v. Kebaso, the Minnesota Supreme Court observed that “section 609.035 contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the most serious of the offenses arising out of a single behavioral incident because imposing up to the maximum punishment for the most serious offense will include punishment for all offenses.” (quotation omitted).
  • State v. Ferguson 729 N.W.2d 604 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
  • State v. Ferguson 729 N.W.2d 604 Minn. Ct. App. 2007