Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Effinger v. State, 380 N.W.2d 483.

46 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Jonathon Duane Taylor Hanson, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
See Effinger v. State , (Mi nn.
State of Minnesota v. James Maurice Williams, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. James Maurice Williams, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Peter William Warren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Peter William Warren Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The test is whether the offenses are part of “a single behavioral incident.”
State of Minnesota v. Stephanie JoNell Guscette Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Stephanie JoNell Guscette Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Bauer I, d at 477; State v. O’Meara
State of Minnesota v. Donald Ernest Beckman Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Donald Ernest Beckman Minn. Ct. App. 2014
The test is whether the offenses are part of “a single behavioral incident.”
State v. Salyers 842 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Salyers 842 N.W.2d 28 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Rivers 787 N.W.2d 206 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Rivers 787 N.W.2d 206 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Bauer 776 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Bauer 776 N.W.2d 462 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
Hathaway v. State 741 N.W.2d 875 Minn. 2007
Hathaway v. State 741 N.W.2d 875 Minn. 2007
State v. Suhon 742 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Suhon 742 N.W.2d 16 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Heath 685 N.W.2d 48 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Heath 685 N.W.2d 48 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
State v. Marchbanks 632 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
State v. Marchbanks 632 N.W.2d 725 Minn. Ct. App. 2001
(reviewing district court’s finding of two separate behavioral acts under clearly erroneous standard).
State v. Cameron 603 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Cameron 603 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Guidelines III.C.2 (double jail credit shall not be given to consecutive sentences); (no double jail credit for consecutive sentence).
State v. Kates 598 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Kates 598 N.W.2d 693 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
Kambon v. State 583 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1998
Kambon v. State 583 N.W.2d 748 Minn. 1998
1 Broberg v. State, 287 Minn. 66, 73
State v. Butterfield 555 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Butterfield 555 N.W.2d 526 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Bookwalter 541 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1995
State v. Bookwalter 541 N.W.2d 290 Minn. 1995
State v. Reiland, 274 Minn. 121, 125
State v. Buhl 520 N.W.2d 177 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Buhl 520 N.W.2d 177 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Allen 482 N.W.2d 228 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Allen 482 N.W.2d 228 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
In applying credit to consecutive sentences, the supreme court has stated that “the jail credit should be applied to only the first sentence since to do otherwise would constitute ‘double credit.’ ”
State v. Elting 480 N.W.2d 152 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
State v. Elting 480 N.W.2d 152 Minn. Ct. App. 1992
14, 1985); (defendant only entitled to jail credit against first consecutive sentence).
State v. Doherty 419 N.W.2d 624 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
State v. Doherty 419 N.W.2d 624 Minn. Ct. App. 1988
Riley v. State 396 N.W.2d 595 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Riley v. State 396 N.W.2d 595 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Piringer v. State 388 N.W.2d 31 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
Piringer v. State 388 N.W.2d 31 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
(a petitioner is not entitled to a full evidentiary hearing when there are no material facts in dispute other than the ultimate question of whether his early release would present a danger to the public and would be incompatible with the welfare of society) (citing Weinandt v. *33 State