Cited by

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

253 citing documents.

State v. Donnay 600 N.W.2d 471 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Behl 573 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Behl 573 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
State v. Folkers 562 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
State v. Folkers 562 N.W.2d 5 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
State v. Sims 553 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Sims 553 N.W.2d 58 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
(prospective only application of recording requirement); (prospective only application of sentencing rules); see also Turner v. IDS Financial Servs., Inc., (court’s rulings are purely prospective only in very limited situations).
State v. Spaeth 552 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1996
State v. Spaeth 552 N.W.2d 187 Minn. 1996
State v. Sebasky 547 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Sebasky 547 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Givens 544 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1996
State v. Givens 544 N.W.2d 774 Minn. 1996
State v. McAdory 543 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. McAdory 543 N.W.2d 692 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
(“[i]f no reasons for departure are stated on the record at the time of sentencing, no departure will be allowed”).
State v. Chaklos 528 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1995
State v. Chaklos 528 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1995
As we said in Williams v. State, “[i]f the reasons given [for a departure] are improper or inadequate, but there is sufficient evidence in the record to justify departure, the departure will be affirmed.”
State v. Bauerly 520 N.W.2d 760 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Bauerly 520 N.W.2d 760 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
(departure will be affirmed, despite improper reasons, if record adequately supports departure).
State v. Bates 507 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Bates 507 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Bale 493 N.W.2d 123 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Bale 493 N.W.2d 123 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
While the guidelines and its statutory authority require a written report, implies that reading the judge’s reasons from the record satisfies the requirement of “written reasons.” No case has been reversed or remanded strictly for the failure to provide written reasons when oral reasons are stated in open court on the record.
State v. Hopkins 486 N.W.2d 809 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Hopkins 486 N.W.2d 809 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Elvin 481 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Allen 482 N.W.2d 228 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Elvin 481 N.W.2d 571 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Allen 482 N.W.2d 228 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Garrett 479 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Garrett 479 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
If no reasons for departure are stated on the record at the time of sentencing, no departure will be allowed.”
State v. Herrmann 479 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Herrmann 479 N.W.2d 724 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Pearson 479 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Pearson 479 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Larkins 479 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Larkins 479 N.W.2d 69 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
1 However, a departure can be affirmed if sufficient evidence exists in the record.
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Fortman 474 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Sundstrom 474 N.W.2d 213 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Fortman 474 N.W.2d 401 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Sundstrom 474 N.W.2d 213 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
a departure from the guidelines will be reversed if the trial court fails to give reasons for departure.
State v. Larson 473 N.W.2d 907 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Larson 473 N.W.2d 907 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Lamar 474 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Lámar 474 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Lamar 474 N.W.2d 1 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
(this court will examine record to see whether the trial court’s reasons justify departure).