Cited by

Icanberry asserts that the district court failed to exercise its discretion during the sentencing hearing by stating, “When a life is taken, there is no leniency in this court.” “Sentences imposed by the district court are reviewed for [an] abuse of discretion.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“This court will generally not exercise its authority to modify a sentence within the presumptive range ‘absent compelling circumstances.’” (), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

(stating that we will rarely disturb a district court’s decision to impose a sentence within the presumptive guidelines range), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

5 “A sentence within the presumptive-sentence range is not a departure from the presumptive sentence but is a presumptive sentence and is generally not subject to appellate review of the district court’s exercise of its discretion.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“[A]ny sentence within the presumptive range for the convicted offense constitutes a presumptive sentence.”

“[A]ny sentence within the presumptive range for the convicted offense constitutes a presumptive sentence.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010); n.2 (Minn. 2008) (explaining that “[a]ll three numbers in any given cell constitute an acceptable sentence based solely on the offense at issue and the offender’s criminal history score”).

“This court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is 6 within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

Because it is “rare” for a district court to abuse its discretion by imposing a sentence within the presumptive range, we will not modify such sentences “absent compelling circumstances.” State v. Delk , ( quotations omitted ), rev. denied (July 20, 2010) .

We “will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

(stating that this court will rarely disturb a district court’s decision to impose a sentence within the presumptive guidelines range), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

(“Only in a rare case will a reviewing court reverse imposition of a presumptive sentence.” (quotation omitted)), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“This court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“This court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 22 20, 2010).

(holding that a sentence at the top of the range provided in the sentencing grid is not a departure), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“[A]ny sentence within the presumptive range for the convicted offense constitutes a presumptive sentence.” State v. Delk , rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“[A]ny sentence within the presumptive range for the convicted offense constitutes a presumptive sentence.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“Sentences imposed by the district court are reviewed for abuse of discretion.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“Only in a ‘rare case’ will a reviewing court reverse imposition of a presumptive sentence.” (), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

constitutes a presumptive sentence.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

n.2 (Minn. 2008) ( “All three numbers in any given cell [on the sentencing guidelines grid] constitute an acceptable sentence based solely on the offense at issue and the offender’s criminal history score—the lowest is not a downward departure, nor is the highest an upward departure.” ); d 426, 428 (Minn. App. 2010) ( “This court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.”),

(stating that a reviewing court “will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range”), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

-29 (Minn. App. 2010), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

-29 (Minn. App. 2010), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

(stating that this court will rarely disturb a district court’s decision to impose a sentence within the presumptive guidelines range).

“Presumptive sentences are seldom overturned.” (quotation omitted), rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“This court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“Sentences imposed by the district court are reviewed for abuse of discretion.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“This court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

Moreover, “[t]his court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when 11 the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010) (emphasis added).

rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010).

“This court will not generally review a district court’s exercise of its discretion to sentence a defendant when the sentence imposed is within the presumptive guidelines range.” rev. denied (Minn. July 20, 2010); (noting that only in a “rare case” will a reviewing court overturn a presumptive sentence); (noting that a presumptive sentence will generally not be m