Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Reece, 625 N.W.2d 822.

59 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Vanik Carlence Pierre Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines “provide uniform standards for the inclusion and weighting of criminal history information that are intended to increase the fairness and equity in the consideration of criminal history.” (quotation omitted).
Demetreious Anderson Baldwin v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2025
The sentences recommended by the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines “are presumed to be appropriate.” Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.D.1
State of Minnesota v. Jermaine La Johnson, Sr. Minn. Ct. App. 2024
The sentencing guidelines “provide uniform standards for the inclusion and weighting of criminal history information that are intended to increase the fairness and equity in the consideration of criminal history.” State v. Reece , 8 (Minn. 2001) (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Amanda Lee Jensrud Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Amanda Lee Jensrud Minn. Ct. App. 2024
The district court should seek to “comply with the sentencing guidelines’ mandate that the court determine how the offender would have been sentenced had the offense occurred in Minnesota at the time of the current offense, not when the offense actually occurred.”
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Douglas Paulson Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.B.5.a (2020)
State of Minnesota v. Eric Demont Wilson Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State v. Reece , Minn. Sent’g Guidelines 2.B.5.a (2014).
State of Minnesota vs Jason Peter Bird Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Simon Garcia Minn. Ct. App. 2022
The sentencing guidelines “provide un iform standards for the inclusion and [weighing] of criminal history information th at are intended to increase the fairness and equity in the considerati on of criminal history.” State v. Reece , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Frederick Duane Fisher Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Guidelines 2 ( Supp. 2017).2 The guidelines “provide uniform standards for the inclusion and weighting of criminal history information that are intended to increase the fairness and equity in the consideration of criminal history.” (quotation omitted).
Eric John Henderson-Bey v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota v. Jose Martin Lugo, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2021
South Dakota conviction The sentencing guidelines “provide un iform standards for the inclusion and weighting of criminal history information th at are intended to increase the fairness and equity in the considerati on of criminal history.” State v. Reece , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Dustin Eugene Bilges Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota v. Jeremy Simon Garcia Minn. Ct. App. 2021
The Minnesota Supreme Court stated that a sentencin g court may not ignore criminal-history points but must determine “in a manner consistent with the requirements of Minnesota’s current sentencing guidelines, how many criminal points [a defendant] should have.” State v. Reece , -26 (Minn. 2001) (concluding that district court erred by failing to analyze foreign convictions because it found they were too severe).
State of Minnesota v. Milo Calvin Ojohn Minn. Ct. App. 2021
The district court shou ld seek to “comply with the sentencing guidelines’ mandate that the court determine how the of fender would have been sentenced had the offense occurred in Minnesota at the time of the current offense, not when the offense actually occurred out of state.”
State of Minnesota v. Brian Anthony Varnado Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Alexander John Cookson Minn. Ct. App. 2020
The sentencing guidelines “provide uniform standards for the inclusion and weighting of criminal history information that are intended to increase the fairness and equity in the consideration of criminal history.” State v. Reece , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Daniel Anthony Cruz Hernandez Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Scott Allen Lipe Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota (A19-0270) (A19-0265) v. Eric Christopher Thorsen (A19-0265) (A19-0270) Minn. Ct. App. 2020
Guidelines 2.B.5.a (2016); d 822, 824 (Minn. 2001).
State of Minnesota v. Billy Gene Hunt Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota v. Richard Danell Dunston Minn. Ct. App. 2019
13 The sentencing guidelines “provide uniform standards for the inclusion and weighting of criminal history information that are intended to increase the fairness and equity in the consideration of criminal history.” State v. Reece , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Michael Anthony Pitts Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Lee Setterstrom Minn. Ct. App. 2019
In determining the points for an out- of-state conviction, the district court must “determine how the offender would have been sentenced had the [prior] offense occurred in Minnesota at the time of the current offense, not when the offense actually occurred out of state.” see also Minn. Sent.
State of Minnesota v. Karl Edward Henze Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota v. Robert Michael Windell Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The sentencing guidelines “provide uniform standards for the inclusion and weighting of criminal history information that are intended to increase the fai rness and equity in the consideration of criminal history.” State v. Reece , (quotation omitted).
State of Minnesota v. Demarcus Lemaine Barker Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Edwards 900 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Edwards 900 N.W.2d 722 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In previous cases, the Minnesota Supreme Court, citing the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines, has required district courts to compare the foreign offense to how the same offense would be treated "at the time of the current offense, not when the offéñse actually occurred out of state.” (citing Minn. Sent.
State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Christopher Glass Minn. Ct. App. 2017
d 822, 825 (Minn. 2001).
State of Minnesota v. Omar Taha Yaseen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Omar Taha Yaseen Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Andre LeBlanc v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Andre LeBlanc v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Shannon Don Quenzer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Shannon Don Quenzer Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“[T]he [district] court must comply with the sentencing guidelines’ mandate that the court determine how the offender would have been sentenced had the offense occurred in Minnesota at the time of the current offense, not when the offense actually occurred out of state.” see also Minn. Sent.
State of Minnesota v. Luis Armando Cubas Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Luis Armando Cubas Minn. Ct. App. 2015
this court is required to remand for resentencing with a proper calculation of respondent’s criminal-history score.
State of Minnesota v. Victor Dupree Whitehead Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Victor Dupree Whitehead Minn. Ct. App. 2014
Guidelines 2.B.5 (stating that section 2.B.1 governs the use of out-of-state convictions); d 822, 824-25 (Minn. 2001) (stating that the sentencing guidelines “require that an offender’s felony convictions under the laws of other states be included in the offender’s Minnesota criminal history score”).
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 853 N.W.2d 819 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 853 N.W.2d 819 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
When aggravating circumstances are present, the district court has discretion to depart, and this court reviews a district court’s departure decision for abuse of discretion
State v. Robideau 817 N.W.2d 180 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Robideau 817 N.W.2d 180 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
Dillon v. State 781 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Dillon v. State 781 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Sanders 775 N.W.2d 883 Minn. 2009
State v. Grampre 766 N.W.2d 347 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Grampre 766 N.W.2d 347 Minn. Ct. App. 2009
State v. Adell 755 N.W.2d 767 Minn. Ct. App. 2008