Cited by

unless there exist identifiable, substantial, and compelling circumstances to support a departure.” Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (2022)

within the applicable [presumptive] range unless there exist identifiable, substantial, and compelling circumstances to support a departure.” Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (Supp. 2023)

If a defendant requests a downward departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances 5 provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” (alteration in original) ( and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012)).

Before departing from a guidelines sentence, a district court first must determine whether “‘aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” (alteration in original) ( and Minn. Sent’ g Guidelines 2.D.1).

If a defendant requests a downward departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” (alteration in original) ( and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1).

Accordingly, the district court “has broad discretion to depart only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present.”

If a defendant requests a downward departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” (alteration in original) ( and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1).

The district court can exercise its discretion to depart from the guidelines “only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present,” and those circumstances provide a “substantial[] and compelling” reason not to impose a guidelines sentence, Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (Supp. 2021).

If a defendant requests a downward departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” ( and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012)).

If a defendant requests a downward departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” (alteration in original) ( and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012)).

If a defendant requests a downward departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” ( 10 (Minn. 1989), and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012)).

If a defendant requests a downward dispositional departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘ mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” ( and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012)).

If a defendant requests a downward dispositional departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘ mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” ( and Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012)).

circumstances are present.” State v. Best , d 426, 427 (Minn. 1989) .

A district court “ has broad discretion to depart” from the sentencing guidelines “only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present.” (emphasis omitted).

A district court “has broad discretion to de part” from the sentenci ng guidelines “only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present.” (emphasis omitted).

(quotations omitted) ( and Minn. Sent.

A district court “has broad discreti on to depart” from the sentencing guidelines “only if aggravating or mitigati ng circumstances are present.” d 426, 427 (Minn. 1989) (e mphasis omitted).

A district court “has broa d discretion to depart” from the sentencing guidelines “if aggravati ng or mitigating circumst ances are present.” State v. Best , (emphasis omitted).

If a defendant requests a downward dispositional departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” and, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” State v. Soto , ( and Minn. Sent.

A district court “has broad discretion to depart only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present.”

If a defendant requests a downward dispositional departure, a district court first must determine whether “‘mitigating circumstances are present’” an d, if so, whether “those circumstances provide a ‘substantial[] and compelling’ reason not to impose a guidelines sentence.” State v. Soto , ( and Minn. Sent.

But a district court “has broad discretion to depart ” from the sentencing guidelines “only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present; if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are not present, the trial court has no discretion to depart.” (emphasis omitted).

Guidelines 2.D.1 (2011)); see also State v. Best , (holding that “the [district] court has broad discretion to depart only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present”) .

Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012) ); State v. Best , , 427 (Minn. 1989).

Guidelines 2.D.1 (2012)); d 426, 427 (Minn. 1989).

if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present; if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are not present, the trial court has no discretion to depart.” (emphasis omitted)

Accordingly, a sentencing court can exercise its discretion to depart from the guidelines “only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present,” and those circumstances provide a “substantial] and compelling” reason not to impose a guidelines sentence, Minn. Sent.

y the facts established by a guilty plea or guilty verdict if “there exist identifiable, substantial, and compelling circumstances to support a sentence outside the range on the grids.” Id.; (explaining that a “district court has discretion to depart ‘only if aggravating or mitigating circumstances are present.’ ” ()).

4 A court may not depart from the presumptive sentence without finding that a defendant’s conduct was “significantly more serious than typically involved in the commission of the offense.”