Cited by
Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Suhon, 742 N.W.2d 16.
-
A25-1390
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
charged in separate counts covering different segments of the victim’s childhood is not a single behavioral incident.” -23 (Minn. App. 2007), rev. denied (Minn. Feb.
- State of Minnesota v. Frank John Rakowiecki Minn. Ct. App. 2026
-
State of Minnesota v. Frank John Rakowiecki
Minn. Ct. App. 2026
d 257, 265-67 (Minn. 2020) (holding that two instances of child sexual abuse against the same victim that occurred at separate times were not part of a single behavioral incident); (concluding that three offenses of child sexual abuse that occurred “in many different rooms and at different times” did not constitute a single behavioral incident), rev. denied (Minn. Feb.
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2025
-20 (Minn. App. 2007), where the defendant was convicted of two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and one count of third- degree criminal sexual conduct for abusing his daughter 6 The details of J.D.H.’s convictions, plea agreement, and sentence are not included in this record.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Thus, “even assuming that [Suarez Rivera] committed each sexual act ‘to satisfy his sexual urges, the mere fact that he committed multiple crimes over 3 Suarez Rivera also argues that the complaint improperly included the same offense-date range for these two counts and maintains that each offense must relate to a “distinct timeframe within [a] long period,”
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2023
For example, in State v. Suhon, this court considered “sex abuse” against a single victim that occurred “on a regular basis.” rev. denied (Feb.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2022
-20, 24-25 (Minn. App. 2007), rev. denied (Minn. Feb.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2021
-20 (Minn. App. 2007), rev. denied (Minn. Feb.
- State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
review denied (Minn. Feb.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
17 review denied (Minn. Feb.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Multiple acts against the same victim do not constitute a single beha vioral incident when the individual acts are separated by time and place.” State v. Suhon , , review denied (Minn. Feb.
-
A17-0191
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
For example, in State v. Suhon, the defendant sexually abused his adopted daughter for ten years—a time period we determined was too protracted to amount to a single behavioral inciden t. review denied (Minn. Feb.
- State v. Barthman 917 N.W.2d 119 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
-
State v. Barthman
917 N.W.2d 119
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Suhon , , 25 (Minn. App. 2007), review denied (Minn. Feb.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“When a single behavioral incident results in the violation of multiple criminal statutes, the offender may be punished only for the most severe offense.” State v. Suhon , review denied (Minn. Feb.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. Feb.
-
State of Minnesota, Respondent,
Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“Multiple acts against the same victim do not constitute a single behavioral incident when the individual acts are separated by time and place.” 24 (Minn. App. 2007) (affirming multiple sentences for sexual assault by defendant against his minor child over a period of 11 years), review denied (Minn. Feb.
- State of Minnesota v. Jeannie Frances Ball Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
State of Minnesota v. Jeannie Frances Ball
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(“Inconsistencies 4 in prosecution evidence do not require reversal.”), review denied (Minn. Feb.
- State of Minnesota v. Wilfred Carl Hudson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
State of Minnesota v. Wilfred Carl Hudson
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. Feb.
- State of Minnesota v. Spidel Wayne Browder Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-
State of Minnesota v. Spidel Wayne Browder
Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But “[i]nconsistencies in the state’s case are not grounds for reversing the jury verdict.” d 16, 20 (Minn. App. 2007) (“Inconsistencies in prosecution evidence do not require reversal.”), review denied (Minn. Feb.
- State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Maurice Galloway Minn. Ct. App. 2014
-
State of Minnesota v. Emmanuel Maurice Galloway
Minn. Ct. App. 2014
We have previously held that “motivation by perverse sexual desires is too broad to constitute a single criminal objective.”
- State v. Daniels 765 N.W.2d 645 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
-
State v. Daniels
765 N.W.2d 645
Minn. Ct. App. 2009
“When the district court has discretion to impose consecutive sentences, we will uphold the sentences unless they are disproportionate to the offense or unfairly exaggerate[ ] the criminality of the defendant’s conduct.” (alteration in original) (quotation omitted).