Cited by

A “straight plea” means that the defendant “pleaded guilty to the offense but did not enter into any agreement regarding sentencing.”

“An error is clear or obvious if it contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” State v. Sanchez-Sanchez, 25 (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted).

2 A defendant enters a “straight plea” when they “plead[ ] guilty to the offense but [do] not enter into any agreement regarding sentencing.” d 324, 327 (Minn. 2016) (citation omitted).

1 Pursuant to a plea 1 A defendant enters a “straight plea” when they “plead[] guilty to the offense but [do] not enter into any agreement regarding sentencing.” d 324, 327 (Minn. 2016).

Appellate courts “review the interpretation and application of the rules of evidence de novo.”

Before trial, Johannes, with the assistance 2 A defendant enters a “straight plea” when they “plead[] guilty to the offense but [do] not enter into any agreement regarding sentencing.” d 324, 327 (Minn. 2016).

1 A defendant enters a “straight plea” when they “plead[] guilty to the offense but [do] not enter into any agreement regarding sentencing.” d 324, 327 (Minn. 2016).

ot “substantial and compelling reasons to depart.” Specifically, the district court acknowledged the existence of some factors favoring a downward departure but determined that the seriousness of the offense outweighed these 1 A defendant enters a “straight plea” when they “plead[] guilty to the offense but [do] not enter into any agreement regarding sentencing.” d 324, 327 (Minn. 2016).

But “[a] defendant may 2 A Blakely trial is conducted to determine whether aggravating sentencing factors exist, and “[a] criminal defendant has the right to a trial by jury or by the court.” (citing Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 301 (2004)); (applying Blakely to Minnesota’s career-offender statute).

After establishing that Kenda understood his rights, the state elicited the following factual basis from him in support of his guilty plea: 1 A “straight plea” involves pleading guilty to the charged offense without “any agreement regarding sentencing.”

An error that was plain is “clear or obvious,” meaning it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct .” (quotations omitted).

The district court stated that these were “up for discussion.” 2 A “straight plea” involves pleading guilty to the charged offense without “any agreement regarding sentencing.”

inder].” (reviewing appellant’s claim that evidence was insufficient to show a pattern of criminal conduct under career-offender statute), rev. 2 A Blakely trial is conducted to determine whether aggravating sentencing factors exist, and “[a] criminal defendant has the right to a trial by jury or by the court.” (citing Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 301 (2004)); (applying Blakely to Minnesota’s career-offender statute).

2 A Blakely trial is conducted to determine whether aggravating sentencing factors exist, and “[a] criminal defendant has the right to a trial by jury or by the court.” (citing Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 301 (2004)).

d 324, 329-30 (Minn. 2016) (describing sentencing trials required under Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296 (2004)); -84 (Minn. 2008).

If a defendant 11 establishes all three factors, we may remedy the error “if it seriously affects the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings.” n.2 (Minn. 2016) (quotation omitted).

An error is plain if it is “clear or obvious.” (quotation omitted).

Klitzke entered a Norgaard plea, claiming he was too intoxicated to remember important details the night of the murder but that there was an adequate factual 1 A straight plea is a plea with no “agreement regarding sentencing.”

“A criminal defendant ha s the right to a trial by jury or by the court .”

An error is plain if it is “clear or obvious,” meaning that it “contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotations omitted).

A straight plea is a plea with no “agreement regarding sentencing.”

An error is plain if it is “clear or obvious.” (quotation omitted).

(“If the dist rict court did not plainly err, then we need not address whether appellant’s substantial rights were affected.”).

An error is plain if it is “clear or obvious.”

An error is plain if it is “clear or obvious.” ().

An error that is plain is one that is “clear or obvious at the time of appeal.” d 324, 330 (Minn. 2016) (quotation omitted).

See State v. Sanchez-Sanchez , (“[Appellate courts] review the i nterpretation and application of the rules of evidence de novo.”).

State v. Sanchez-Sanchez , , 330 (Minn. 2016) (quoting State v. Peltier , , 799 (Minn. 2016) ).

d 324, 331 (Minn. 2016).

27, 2015), aff’d as modified on other grounds , .

see also Blakely v. Washington , 542 U.S. 296, 301 –02 (2004).

In contrast, a “straight plea,” consists of a plea of guilty to the charged offense without “any agreement regarding sentencing.” d 324, 327 (Minn. 2016).

An error is plain if it is “clear or obvious at the time of appeal.” (quotation omitted).

First, Willis notes that we recently interpreted the word “sentencing” to mean “the proceeding at which a judge listens to the parties’ sentencing arguments; considers all the relevant facts, including the special verdicts returned at an earlier Blakely trial; and then announces the sentence.” (concluding that the word “sentencing” as used in Minn. R. Evid.

(stating that “[a] plain error is an error that is clear or obvious at the time of appeal,” in that “it contravenes case law, a rule, or a standard of conduct.” (quotations omitted)).