Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Vickla v. State, 793 N.W.2d 265.

45 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“Minnesota Statutes section 609.1095, subd ivision 4, states that a court ‘may impose an aggravated durational departure from the presumptive sentence up to the statutory maximum’ when the defendant qualifies as a [career] offender.”
State of Minnesota v. Casey Leon Holt Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Casey Leon Holt Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Dylan Thomas Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Dylan Thomas Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
comparable sentences in departure cases to determine if a sentence is unjustifiably disparate.”
State of Minnesota v. Gavin Patrick Meany Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Gavin Patrick Meany Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Steven Todd Parker, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
It also “allows the 18 court to consider a defendant’s entire criminal history to determine whether the defendant meets the statutory criteria of a repeat-felony offender.”
A21-1500 Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
But we “may re view a sentence to de termine whether it is inconsistent with the statutory requirement s, unreasonable, inappropriate, excessive, unjustifiably disparate, or not warranted by the findings of fact issued by the district court.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Appellate courts review a district court’s decision to depart from the presumptive sentencing range for an abuse of discretion, and will affirm if the reasons for the departure are “legally permissible and factually supported in the record.” d 265, 269 (Minn. 2011).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Edson Celin Benitez Dominguez, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Vickla v. State , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Neal, d at 546; see also Vickla v. State
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
When a defendant “admitted at his guilty -plea hearing he ‘had five or more prior felonies’ and ‘that this particular offense forms a pattern with those offenses,’” those admissions “[could] be used to increase the sentence above the presumptive guidelines sentence.” Vickla v. State
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Justin Dillard Thomas 890 N.W.2d 413 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Justin Dillard Thomas 890 N.W.2d 413 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
13 If the factfinder concludes that the state has met each element of the career offender statute, “[t]he statute does not limit the court’s discretion [or] require any additional findings before sentencing a defendant to the statutory maximum.” –71 (Minn. 2011).
State of Minnesota v. August Latimothy Fleming 883 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. August Latimothy Fleming 883 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Glenn Kevin Hazley Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Glenn Kevin Hazley Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Marlow Shelton McDonald Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Marlow Shelton McDonald Minn. Ct. App. 2016
If the reasons given are legally permissible and factually supported in the record, then [a reviewing court] will affirm the departure.” (quotation and citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Dwayne Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Dwayne Brown Minn. Ct. App. 2015
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
(affirming an aggravated sentence imposed pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 609.1095, even though the sentence enhancement double-counted the defendant’s prior convictions); -46 (Minn. 2003) (same).
State of Minnesota v. Rudolph Gordon Cooper Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Rudolph Gordon Cooper Minn. Ct. App. 2015
5 affirm the departure.” (quotation and citation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Robert Castillo Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Robert Castillo Minn. Ct. App. 2015
See Neal, d at 546-48; (reviewing sentence imposed pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 609.1095, subd.
Jason Donald Matakis v. State of Minnesota 862 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 2015
Jason Donald Matakis v. State of Minnesota 862 N.W.2d 33 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Donald William Laquier Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Donald William Laquier Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Justin Thadeus Amick Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Justin Thadeus Amick Minn. Ct. App. 2015
it, under the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 303–04, 124 S. Ct. 2531, 2537 (2004), “other than a prior conviction, any fact that increases the sentence for a crime beyond the presumptive sentence established by the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines for a particular crime must be submitted to the jury and proven beyond a reasonable doubt.”
State of Minnesota v. Martin David Hutchins, Jr. 856 N.W.2d 281 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Martin David Hutchins, Jr. 856 N.W.2d 281 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Leathers 799 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 2011
State v. Leathers 799 N.W.2d 606 Minn. 2011
See, (concluding that Minn.Stat.