Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Benson, 330 N.W.2d 879.

23 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Daniel John Wyatt, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(defendant pleaded guilty without awareness that there would be additional period of conditional release after incarceration); (defendant pleaded guilty based on lower criminal-history score than was correct); (same).
Arthur Rafie Mullins v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Arthur Rafie Mullins v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
13 Mullins argues that a “plea agreement based on a mutual mistake regarding the presumptive sentence generally renders a guilty plea unintelligent,”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
WL 3558335, at *4 (Minn. App. July 21, 2014), rev. denied (Minn. Sept.
Blama Jamie Koilor, Jr., petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
hdrawal of a guilty plea or re sentencing where the de fendant was mistaken that the offense was not subject to a mandatory conditional release term); (remanding to permit withdrawal of a guilty plea where the defendant mistakenly believed that the presumptive sentence would be a stayed sentence, rendering the plea invalid); State v. Benson , -81 (Minn. 1983) (remanding to permit withdrawal of a guilty plea where the defendant was mistaken regarding the applicable criminal history score); (“A di
Teresa Michelle Peterson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
For example, the supreme court suggested that a defendant who had pleaded guilty pursuant to a mistaken belief concerning his criminal-history score and his presumptive sentence “could withdraw [his] plea” or “could let the [district] court resentence him” to “the shortest sentence within the presumptive sentenc
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Accordingly, t he typical procedure following a defendant’s successful plea-withdrawal motion is for the case to “proceed to trial.” Id.; (stating that defendant’s remedy for mistaken guilty plea is to withdraw the guilty plea and “stand trial on the original charges”); (upon reversal for inadequate factual basis to support a guilty plea, r emanding to allow the defendant the “
State of Minnesota v. Melissa Rae Guillette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Melissa Rae Guillette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
see also Jumping Eagle, d at 44-45.
State v. DeZeler 427 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 1988
State v. DeZeler 427 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 1988
Lallier v. State 403 N.W.2d 880 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Lallier v. State 403 N.W.2d 880 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
the issue was addressed in a different context.
Spann v. State 368 N.W.2d 377 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Spann v. State 368 N.W.2d 377 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Esparza 367 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Esparza 367 N.W.2d 619 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
(defendant’s misunderstanding of potential sentence, which was expressly incorporated into plea agreement, was not appropriate basis for downward departure, only for allowing withdrawal of plea).
State v. Bridgeforth 357 N.W.2d 393 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Bridgeforth 357 N.W.2d 393 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
Bridgeforth’s is misplaced.
State v. Noreen 354 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
State v. Noreen 354 N.W.2d 77 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
-81 (Minn.1983) (defendant’s mistaken understanding about the presumptive sentence is a ground for letting him withdraw the guilty plea and stand trial; alternatively, defendant could let the trial court resentence him).