Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Stanke, 764 N.W.2d 824.

71 citing documents.

Luke Joshua Cain, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(“Only if we conclude that the district court would have imposed the same sentence absent the improper .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“In deciding whether to affirm or remand, we must determine whether the district court would have imposed the same sentence absent reliance upon the improper aggravating factor.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
A district court may impose a greater-than- double durational departure only if it finds “severe aggravating factors.” (emphasis added).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
A district court may impose a greater-than-double durational departure only if there are “severe aggravating factors.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
While an error, a remand is unnecessary if we determine “the district court would have imposed the same sentence absent reliance upon the improper aggravating factor.” d 824, 828 (Minn. 2009).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(stating that facts underlying a departure must be found by a jury or admitted by defendant).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A district court may impose a greater-than-double durational departure only if it finds a “severe aggravating factor.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A district court may impose a greater-tha n-double departure if there are “severe aggravating factors.” State v. Stanke
State of Minnesota, ex rel. Gumdel Nygare Gilo, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
“In doing so, we consider the weight given to the invalid factor and whether any remaining factors found by the court independently justify the 16 departure.” State v. Stanke
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(affirming greater -than-double upward departure based on evidence in the trial record and the existe nce of two aggravating factors), (“After Blakely, we no longer independently review the record for evidence to justify a departure because the issue of whether additional facts exist to support the departure is a question of fact for a Blakely jury, unless the defendant has waived his or her right to a Blakely jury.”), and State
Minn. 2020
Jackson, d at 358; Jones, d at 851.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
When deciding whether to affirm or remand, “we must determine whether the district court would have imposed the same sentence absent reliance upon the i mproper aggravating factor.” State v. Stanke , (citation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
When a district court relies on a combination of proper and improper aggravating factors in making a sentencing decision, “we must determine whether the district court would have imposed the same sentence absent reliance upon the improper aggravating factor.” (d 672, 682 (Minn. 2008)).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Earl Lionell Ward Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Earl Lionell Ward Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Ferguson, d at 590; Vickla, d at 269–71; see also State v. Stanke –29 (Minn. 2009) (remand for resentencing is not required so long as the appellate court determines that the district court would impose the same sentence relying on at least one proper aggravating factor).
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Blocker Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Blocker Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[F]or the district court to impose a greater-than-double-durational sentence, there must be severe aggravating factors.”
State of Minnesota v. Lawrence Lee Hicks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Lawrence Lee Hicks Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Brock William Orwig Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Brock William Orwig Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ammanuel Ray Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Ammanuel Ray Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Paul Adams Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Paul Adams Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Edwards, d at 602 (-28 (Minn. 2009) (holding that because the 40-year sentence for fleeing officer resulting in death 9 contemplated vulnerability of officer, it was not available as an aggravating factor in sentencing)).
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
See Peake, d at 301 (noting that the repeat offender factor examines whether the 3 We followed a (concluding that an “officer’s particular vulnerability” could not support departure in sentencing for conviction of fleeing a peace officer resulting in death, Minn. Stat. § 609.487, subd.
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Mangan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Mangan Minn. Ct. App. 2015
d 824, 827 (Minn. 2009).
State of Minnesota v. Larry Darnell Lakes Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Larry Darnell Lakes Minn. Ct. App. 2015
For example, the supreme court affirmed an upward departure for an offender convicted of fleeing a police officer resulting in death because the offender’s high-speed chase involved a number of unusual factors.
State of Minnesota v. Jeffery Dale Trevino Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jeffery Dale Trevino Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. President Pimping Austin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Rafael Antonio Alfaro Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Rafael Antonio Alfaro Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“[F]or the district court to impose a greater-than-double-durational sentence, there must be severe aggravating factors.”
State of Minnesota v. President Pimping Austin Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Severity “[T]o impose a greater-than-double-durational sentence, there must be severe aggravating factors.”
State of Minnesota v. David Eugene Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. David Eugene Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2014
d 824, 827 (Minn. 2009).
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 853 N.W.2d 819 Minn. Ct. App. 2014