Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Miller, 842 N.W.2d 474.

44 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Even when a district court finds that the state has met this burden, the court’s decision to award restitution “must be supported by facts on the record.” rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Steven Craig Morrow Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Steven Craig Morrow Minn. Ct. App. 2024
While the district court used the “not tangential” language from this court’s (predating Boettcher), the district court also cited to Boettcher in its order and found that the damages were a “direct cause” of the 6 victim’s loss.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
See, e.g., State v. Paludicki , - 68 (Minn. 2007) (evidence provided by the record); (evidence found in restitution payment schedule); (evidence provided by the PSI and the defendant’s statement); (reversing and remanding because there was no PSI and no defendant’s statement to provide evidence), rev. denied, (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Wigham, d at 659; rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
The state concedes that the district court did not expressly consider Makuac’s -80 (Minn. App. 2014) (reversing restitution order and remanding for further findings because the district court failed to consider the offender’s ability to pay, even though the offender raised the issue for the first time on direct appeal), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.15, 2014.
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2021
14 to pay, in part because the court informed the defendant that it would rely on the relevant PSI information when making its restitution decision and because it heard evidence regarding the defendant’s future ability to pay); (reversing and remanding for proper consideration of the defendant’s ability to pay because there was no PSI and restitution hearing did not address the defendant’s ability to pay).
Eugene Gerald Secord, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Conduct Canon 2 (“ A Judge Shall Perform the Duties of Judicial Office Impartially, Co mpetently, and Diligently.”); rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
In the Matter of the Welfare of: A. A., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
See I.N.A., d at 645; review denied (Minn. Apr.
In the Matter of the Welfare of M. S.-R. Minn. Ct. App. 2020
“It may not order restitution fo r conduct that is only 6 tangentially related to the criminal act that caused the loss.” State v. Miller , d 474, 477 (Minn. App. 2014), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
-86 (Minn. 1995); State v. Miller , , review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
This case is akin to State v. Miller, where we reversed a restitution order in part because “[t]he record [did] not provide any apparent basis for us to infer [Miller’s] ability to pay in the limited timeframe.”
In the Matter of the Welfare of: A. I. Q., Child. Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Indeed, “[r]estitution has limits”; a dist rict court should only order restitution for “losses the defendant directly caused by the conduct that led to h[er] conviction.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
And a district court “may not order restitution for conduct that is only tangentially related to the criminal act that caused the loss.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2018
See, e.g. , State v. Miller , , 478 (Minn. App. 2014) (affirming the district court’s decision to order joint and several restitution for medical expenses), rev. denied (Minn. Apr.
A17-0708 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
But “[t]here is no strict requirement regarding how the district court should address the issue.” (emphasis omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
In re the Welfare of I.N.A. 902 N.W.2d 635 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In re the Welfare of I.N.A. 902 N.W.2d 635 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. Apr.
In the Matter of the Welfare of: A. G., Child Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The district court should order restitution only for losses the defendant directly caused by the conduct that led to his conviction.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
[, 478] (Minn. App. 2014).
A16-0880 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Emile Rey 890 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Emile Rey 890 N.W.2d 135 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
-45 (Minn. App. 2014) (explaining the district court’s need to consider the harm and loss to the victims when ordering restitution) (citations omitted); (explaining that a district court does not need to issue specific findings on the defendant’s ability to pay), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Robert Neil Ackland Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Robert Neil Ackland Minn. Ct. App. 2016
In fact, “[t]here is no strict requirement regarding how the district court should address the issue.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
Lana Dawn Hansch Barnes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Lana Dawn Hansch Barnes v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 474, 477 (Minn. App. 2014), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. William Heminchi Underhill Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. William Heminchi Underhill Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Appellant cites State v. Miller, and asserts “the district court cannot completely fail to consider the defendant’s ability to pay.” review denied (Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Doan Meshell Engel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Doan Meshell Engel Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
Tony Lee Love v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Tony Lee Love v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
20, 2002); (reversing the restitution order and remanding where the district court failed to make findings regarding Miller’s ability to pay and ordered the full amount of restitution to be paid in 90 days despite Miller’s lack of resources and unemployment), review denied (Apr.
Michael Anthony Powell v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Michael Anthony Powell v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
But a victim’s losses must be “directly caused by the conduct that led to [the defendant’s] conviction.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
Peter Loren Martel v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Peter Loren Martel v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
They “are entitled to restitution for losses they incur from the crime.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
Jolonda Rae Roberts v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Jolonda Rae Roberts v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Sara Ann Berkness Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Sara Ann Berkness Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The district court should order restitution only for losses the defendant directly caused by the conduct that led to his conviction.” (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Will Alexander 855 N.W.2d 340 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Andrew Will Alexander 855 N.W.2d 340 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“The restitution award must be supported by facts on the record.” review denied (Minn. Apr.