Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite Neal v. State, 658 N.W.2d 536.

62 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Wiley points to the supreme court’s to support the contention that a quadruple durational departure from the presumptive sentence, based on his status as a career offender, is excessive and unreasonable.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
Bruce Ray Fairbanks, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
We affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded for the district court to determine the presumptive sentence for the kidnapping conviction in light of the Minnesota Supreme Court’s
State of Minnesota v. Dylan Thomas Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Dylan Thomas Peterson Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Gavin Patrick Meany Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Gavin Patrick Meany Minn. Ct. App. 2024
See, -49 (Minn. 2003) (reversing more-than-double upward departure of 480 months on kidnapping conviction and remanding for imposition of sentence of between 216 and 240 months); -71 (Minn. 1988) (modifying life sentence on first-degree murder and five consecutive 60-month sentences
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Moore relies on Neal v. State , as authority for reversing an unreasonable sentence.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
(“Departures under the [dangerous-offender] statute are justified on the basis of the offender’s criminal history, not on aggravating factors .
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
8 “The dangerous-offender statute is a sentencing statute that permits durational departures not otherwise authorized by the sentencing guidelines.” Neal v. State
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
In addition, the terms of the statute do not limit the length of departures.”
Leanne Starr, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“The sentencing guidelines require compelling circumstances to justify a durational departure, and [Minnesota caselaw] requires the existence of severe aggravating circumstances before a court may impose a sentence greater than double the presumptive sentence.”
State of Minnesota v. Peter Clare Hoagland Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Justin Dillard Thomas 890 N.W.2d 413 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Justin Dillard Thomas 890 N.W.2d 413 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Peter Clare Hoagland Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Earl Lionell Ward Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Earl Lionell Ward Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Thus, “the statute authorize[s] the sentence to be increased to the statutory maximum without the presence of severe aggravating circumstances.”
State of Minnesota v. August Latimothy Fleming 883 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. August Latimothy Fleming 883 N.W.2d 790 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Robert John Meyers 869 N.W.2d 893 Minn. 2015
(affirming an aggravated sentence imposed pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 609.1095, even though the sentence enhancement double-counted the defendant’s prior convictions); -46 (Minn. 2003) (same).
State of Minnesota v. Rudolph Gordon Cooper Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Rudolph Gordon Cooper Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The sentencing guidelines require compelling circumstances to justify a durational departure, and [Minnesota caselaw] requires the existence of severe aggravating circumstances before a court may impose a sentence greater than double the presumptive sentence.”
State of Minnesota v. Robert Castillo Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Robert Castillo Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“The dangerous-offender statute is a sentencing statute that permits durational departures not otherwise authorized by the sentencing guidelines.”
State of Minnesota v. Raheem Michael Kemokai Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Raheem Michael Kemokai Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Minn. Stat. § 609.1095, subd.
State of Minnesota v. Donald William Laquier Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Donald William Laquier Jackson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Paul Collum Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Ronald Paul Collum Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Generally, a district court cannot order a sentence longer than the upper departure limit of “double the maximum presumptive sentence length.” ().
State of Minnesota v. Wayne William Leistico Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Wayne William Leistico Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Tyshawn Lanier Darden, Appellant.. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Tyshawn Lanier Darden, Appellant.. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
-48 (Minn. 2003) (comparing defendant’s 480-month kidnapping sentence to other cases involving kidnapping and determining that the sentence was excessive and unreasonable).
State v. Vang 847 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 2014
State v. Vang 847 N.W.2d 248 Minn. 2014
Vickla v. State 793 N.W.2d 265 Minn. 2011
Vickla v. State 793 N.W.2d 265 Minn. 2011
to conclude that district courts “should consider sentences imposed in other cases for the same offense to ensure that a sentence is proportional to the gravity of the offense and not unreasonable or excessive.” Vickla, d at 359 .
State v. Edwards 774 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 2009
State v. McLaughlin 725 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 2007
State v. McLaughlin 725 N.W.2d 703 Minn. 2007
State v. Rannow 703 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
State v. Rannow 703 N.W.2d 575 Minn. Ct. App. 2005