Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Willie Edd Reynolds v. State of Minnesota, 888 N.W.2d 125.

64 citing documents.

State v. Overweg 914 N.W.2d 410 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Reynolds v. State , , 129 (Minn. 2016).
State of Minnesota v. Steven Roger Jones Minn. Ct. App. 2018
-96 (Minn. 2015); see, d 257, 263 (Minn. App. 2016) (reversing imposition of conditional-release term because defendant did not admit, and a jury did not find, that the defendant w as a risk-level III offender at the time of the offense), aff’d
State of Minnesota v. Abdirizak Osman Salad Minn. Ct. App. 2018
“The interpretation of the Minnesota Rules of Criminal Procedure is a question we review de novo.”
State v. Meger 901 N.W.2d 418 Minn. 2017
State v. Meger 901 N.W.2d 418 Minn. 2017
aff'd, which was pending before us at the time, the court of appeals held that the district court did not err in construing Meger’s motion as a motion to correct his sentence under Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota v. Louis Ambrose Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Kirby 899 N.W.2d 485 Minn. 2017
State v. Kirby 899 N.W.2d 485 Minn. 2017
See Minn. Stat. § 609.095 (a) (2016)
Eldon Paul Koestler v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
9 motion vi olates the separation of powers.” Reynolds v. State
Lonnell Javey Powell v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Williams v. State 899 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Williams v. State 899 N.W.2d 504 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
9, permits a court to correct a “sentence not authorized by law.” A sentence is unauthorized by law if it is “contrary to law or applicable statutes.” (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Robert Nicholas Heinze Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Tony Dejuan Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[F]or a sentence to be unauthorized, it must be contrary to law or applicable statutes.” (quotation omitted).