Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Mendoza, 638 N.W.2d 480.

104 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
He contends that this court has held that a district court abuses its discretion “by considering the defendants’ immigration status and possible deportation when sentencing them to prison terms.” See State v. Mendoza , 84 (Minn. App. 2002), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Chaz Jacobi Beckman Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Chaz Jacobi Beckman Minn. Ct. App. 2017
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Jerry Lee Collins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jerry Lee Collins Minn. Ct. App. 2016
A district court, though, is required to exercise its discretion “by deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Tetyang Puok Juate-Yout Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Tetyang Puok Juate-Yout Minn. Ct. App. 2016
d 480, 483 (Minn. App. 2002), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Donald Beulah Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Criticized State of Minnesota v. Armando DeLaCruz, Jr. 884 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(holding that the district court abused its discretion by failing to consider factors for a sentencing departure); (“This 8 While Westlaw states that Le has been “abrogated,” Rubey does not expressly criticize or overrule the decision to excuse the deadline; rather, Rubey notes that Le, along with other decisions, relied on “confusing” caselaw that deemed new-trial deadlines to be “jurisdictional.” 714
State of Minnesota v. Nathaniel Donald Beulah Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Duane Meredith Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Duane Meredith Smith Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Mendoza, -84 (Minn. App. 2002), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. David Arthur Barnes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Davie Eugene McCoy Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Davie Eugene McCoy Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. David Arthur Barnes Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Scott Anthony Hebert Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Scott Anthony Hebert Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Christopher Desjarlais Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Christopher Desjarlais Minn. Ct. App. 2016
This court will reverse the denial of a motion for a sentencing departure only if there is an exceptional basis justifying departure, or if the district court failed to exercise its discretion, see, review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Andrew Swan Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Timothy Andrew Swan Minn. Ct. App. 2016
The district court exercises its discretion by “deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Jesus Ivan Torres-Lopez, a/k/a Jesus Ivan Lopez-Torres Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Distinguished State of Minnesota v. Jesus Ivan Torres-Lopez, a/k/a Jesus Ivan Lopez-Torres Minn. Ct. App. 2016
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Jonathon Michael Honeycutt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jonathon Michael Honeycutt Minn. Ct. App. 2016
If the district court departs from a presumptive sentence, “it must exercise that discretion by deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Steven Andre Moore Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Steven Andre Moore Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“If the district court has discretion to depart from a presumptive sentence, it must exercise that discretion by deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Reynolds Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Nathan John Reynolds Minn. Ct. App. 2015
The district court exercises its discretion by “deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. John Jay Pederson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Adam Michael Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. John Jay Pederson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“If the district court has discretion to depart from a presumptive sentence, it must exercise that discretion by deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Adam Michael Lee Minn. Ct. App. 2015
When a district court has discretion to depart, “it must exercise that discretion by deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Wayne Regguinti Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Curtis Wayne Regguinti Minn. Ct. App. 2015
review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Hope Marie Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Hope Marie Carlson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(remanding “[b]ecause we cannot conclude from the record that the district court made a deliberate decision to impose presumptive sentences by weighing reasons for and against departure”), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Anthony Engebretson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Gregory Anthony Engebretson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
When a district court imposes a presumptive sentence, this “court may not interfere with the sentencing court’s exercise of discretion, as long as the record shows the sentencing court carefully evaluated all the testimony and information presented before making a determination.” (quotation omitted); (“If 7 the district court has discretion to depart from a presumptive sentence, it must exercise that discretion by deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.”), review denied
State of Minnesota v. Luke Mathias Erkkila Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Luke Mathias Erkkila Minn. Ct. App. 2014
When a district court imposes a presumptive sentence, this “court may not interfere with the sentencing court’s exercise of discretion, as long as the record shows the sentencing court carefully evaluated all the testimony and information presented before making a determination.” (quotation omitted); (“If the district court has discretion to depart from a presumptive sentence, it must exercise 3 In fact, Erkkila’s brief notes that since he “arrived at MCF – St.
State of Minnesota v. David Edward Westgard Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. David Edward Westgard Minn. Ct. App. 2014
See State v. Mendoza, 9 (remanding case in which “an exercise of discretion may not have occurred”), review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Tawnja Rene Wallace Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Tawnja Rene Wallace Minn. Ct. App. 2014
“If the district court has discretion to depart from a presumptive sentence, it must exercise that discretion by deliberately considering circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State of Minnesota v. Gary Michael Veesenmeyer-Trojanowski Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Gary Michael Veesenmeyer-Trojanowski Minn. Ct. App. 2014
But a district court must “deliberately consider[] circumstances for and against departure.” review denied (Minn. Apr.
State v. Peter 825 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Peter 825 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
It did so white acknowledging our holding that immigration consequences are not sentencing factors, review denied (Minn. Apr.

Explore

Outcomes

Cited by