Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Williams v. State, 361 N.W.2d 840.

253 citing documents.

State v. Stanke 764 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 2009
State v. Stanke 764 N.W.2d 824 Minn. 2009
State v. Abrahamson 758 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Abrahamson 758 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Adell 755 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
State v. Adell 755 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2008
2531, 2537 , 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), when we reviewed a district court’s decision to depart, : 1.
State v. Jones 745 N.W.2d 845 Minn. 2008
State v. Jones 745 N.W.2d 845 Minn. 2008
State v. Coleman 731 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Coleman 731 N.W.2d 531 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Black v. State 725 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
Black v. State 725 N.W.2d 772 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Losh 721 N.W.2d 886 Minn. 2006
State v. Losh 721 N.W.2d 886 Minn. 2006
State v. Thompson 720 N.W.2d 820 Minn. 2006
State v. Thompson 720 N.W.2d 820 Minn. 2006
which permits appellate courts to examine the record to determine whether the reasons given by the trial court justify the departure, although legitimate, is not implicated by our decision in this case.
State v. Shattuck 689 N.W.2d 785 Minn. 2004
State v. Petschl 688 N.W.2d 866 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Petschl 688 N.W.2d 866 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Rourke 681 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Rourke 681 N.W.2d 35 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
The Minnesota Supreme Court has held that if the reasons given for departure are “improper or inadequate, but there is sufficient evidence in the record to justify the departure, the departure will be affirmed.”
State v. Foreman 680 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2004
State v. Foreman 680 N.W.2d 536 Minn. 2004
Taylor v. State 670 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 2003
Taylor v. State 670 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 2003
State v. Richardson 670 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2003
State v. Richardson 670 N.W.2d 267 Minn. 2003
State v. Geller 665 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 2003
State v. Geller 665 N.W.2d 514 Minn. 2003
The district court did not state on the record at the time of sentencing the reasons for departure as required by the sentencing guidelines and this court’s
State v. Dominguez 663 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
State v. Dominguez 663 N.W.2d 563 Minn. Ct. App. 2003
(stating that even if reasons cited for departure are inadequate or improper, if there is *568 sufficient evidence in record to justify departure, departure should be affirmed).
State v. Lindsey 654 N.W.2d 718 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Lindsey 654 N.W.2d 718 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
“[I]f no reasons for departure are stated on the record at the time of sentencing, no departure will be allowed.”
State v. Sanchez-Sanchez 654 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Sanchez-Sanchez 654 N.W.2d 690 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Thao 649 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2002
State v. Thao 649 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2002
State v. Simmons 646 N.W.2d 564 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Simmons 646 N.W.2d 564 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
(stating a departure will be affirmed if there is sufficient record evidence to support departure).
State v. Sanders 644 N.W.2d 483 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Sanders 644 N.W.2d 483 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Misquadace 644 N.W.2d 65 Minn. 2002
State v. Misquadace 644 N.W.2d 65 Minn. 2002
State v. McIntosh 641 N.W.2d 3 Minn. 2002
State v. McIntosh 641 N.W.2d 3 Minn. 2002
State v. Misquadace 629 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Misquadace 629 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(“If no reasons for departure are stated on the record at the time of sentencing, no departure will be allowed.”).
State v. Ohrt 619 N.W.2d 790 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Ohrt 619 N.W.2d 790 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
State v. Donnay 600 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 1999