Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Clarkin, 817 N.W.2d 678.

47 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Lazarous Lazaro Thomas Minn. Ct. App. 2026
custody on a separate offense beginning on the date “when (1) the State has completed its investigation in a manner that does not suggest manipulation by the State, and (2) the State has probable cause and sufficient evidence to prosecute its case against the defendant with a reasonable likelihood of actually convicting the defendant of the offense for which he is charged.”
State of Minnesota v. Robert Kenneth Icanberry Minn. Ct. App. 2026
“We review the factual findings underlying jail - credit determinations for clear error, but we review questions of law de novo.”
State of Minnesota v. Devin Dion Tillman Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The defendant bears “the burden of establishing that he is entitled to jail credit for any specific period of time.”
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Wayne Taleronik Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(emphasizing “the importance of ensuring that the concurrent sentencing rules are appropriately applied to all sentences and preventing State delays .
Jonathan Nicholas Turner v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Jeremiah John Dahl Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“The decision wh ether to award credit is a mixed question of fact and law; the court must determine the circumstances of the custody the defendant seeks credit for, and then apply the rules to those circumstances.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Brent Richmond Perdue Minn. Ct. App. 2023
4(B); (“A criminal defendant is entitled to jail credit for time spent in custody in connection with the offense or behavioral incident being sentenced.” (quotation omitted)).
Matthew Howard Isensee v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“The defendant has the burden of establishing that he is entitled to jail credit for any specific period of time.”
State of Minnesota v. Joshua James Jerde Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. George Robert Lyons Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Guidelines 3.C.2.b.; -86 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota v. Dale Eugene McDonald Minn. Ct. App. 2022
“A criminal defendant is entitled to jail credit for time spent in custody in connection with the offense or behavioral incident being sentenced.” State v. Clarkin , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Christopher Kurtenbach Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Bradley Patrick Barnett Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Dominique Demetris Wright Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota (A19-0270) (A19-0265) v. Eric Christopher Thorsen (A19-0265) (A19-0270) Minn. Ct. App. 2020
5 v. Clarkin, , 687 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota v. Craig Stevens Handeland Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Duane Cedric Allen Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Clarkin , see also Johnson , d at 379 (“The decision to award custody credit is not discretionary with the district court.”).
State of Minnesota v. Anthony Jerome Woodraska Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Roy 928 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2019
State v. Roy 928 N.W.2d 341 Minn. 2019
State v. Clarkin , , 687 (Minn. 2012).
State v. Roy 920 N.W.2d 227 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Roy 920 N.W.2d 227 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Clarkin , , 687 (Minn. 2012).
State of Minnesota v. Glenn DeJwuan Truesdale Minn. Ct. App. 2018
D E C I S I O N “The decision whether to award credit is a mixed question of fact and law.” (quotation omitted).
Jonathon Duane Taylor Hanson v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Clarkin , d 678, 685-86 (Minn. 2012).
Michael John Husten v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota v. Guy Robert Franklin Rabold Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Donquarius Davon Copeland v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Deciding “whether to award [jail] credit is a mixed question of fact and law; the court must determine the circumstances of the custody the defendant seeks credit for, and then apply the rules to those circumstances.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Dalfonzo Montreal Thompson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
(quotation and citations omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Robera Abdella Ganamo Minn. Ct. App. 2017
D E C I S I O N “A cri minal defendant is entitled to jail credit for time spent in custody ‘in connection with the offense or behavioral incident being sentenced.’” (citing Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Senty-Haugen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Arthur Senty-Haugen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Simeon Leon Brooks v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Simeon Leon Brooks v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“The decision whether to award credit is a mixed question of fact and law.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. David Charles Adams Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Jacqueay Roberson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Derrick Jacqueay Roberson Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“The decision whether to award credit is a mixed question of fact and law.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. David Charles Adams Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“A criminal defendant is entitled to jail credit for time spent in custody ‘in connection with the offense or behavior incident being sentenced.’” (quoting Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Lorraine Peltier Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Lorraine Peltier Minn. Ct. App. 2016
ense, but that credit only covers the time after the date when the state has completed its investigation “in a manner that does not suggest manipulation by the State, and the State has probable cause and sufficient evidence to prosecute its case against the defendant with a reasonable likelihood of actually convicting the defendant of the offense for which [s]he is charged.”
Brett Thomas Green v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Brett Thomas Green v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
for time in custody after the date when “(1) the [s]tate has completed its investigation in a manner that does not suggest manipulation by the [s]tate, and (2) the [s]tate has probable cause and 8 sufficient evidence to prosecute its case against the defendant with a reasonable likelihood of actually convicting the defendant.”
State of Minnesota v. Jesus Ivan Torres-Lopez, a/k/a Jesus Ivan Lopez-Torres Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jesus Ivan Torres-Lopez, a/k/a Jesus Ivan Lopez-Torres Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[The] decision whether to award [custody] credit is a mixed question of fact and law.” (quotation omitted).
James Darnell Posey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
James Darnell Posey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Mahle Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Mahle Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The [district] court does not have discretion in awarding jail credit.”