Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Olson, 379 N.W.2d 524.

42 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
(“[I]t is the [district] court’s role to resolve any factual dispute bearing on the defendant’s criminal-history score.”); see also Marchbanks, d at 731 (“Whether multiple offenses form part of a single behavioral act is a question of fact.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
police officer merely approached a prostitute, and the prostitute initiated a sexual exchange by telling the officer of the cost for “a woman of his choice,” brought him to a room, and told him to undress); (requiring the defendant to establish that the state did more than merely solicit the subject crime), rev’d in part on other grounds
State of Minnesota, Minn. 2018
See, ; (explaining that restitution ordered for damage to vehicle must be supported by the record).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
“[I]t is the trial court’s role to resolve any factual dispute bearing on the defendant’s criminal history score.” State v. Olson , (M inn.
State v. Chauvin 723 N.W.2d 20 Minn. 2006
State v. Chauvin 723 N.W.2d 20 Minn. 2006
State v. Ascheman 589 N.W.2d 486 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
State v. Ascheman 589 N.W.2d 486 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
527 n. 6 (Minn. 1986) (noting that use of special interrogatories or special verdicts would be radical departure from established criminal practice).
State v. Roloff 562 N.W.2d 29 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
State v. Roloff 562 N.W.2d 29 Minn. Ct. App. 1997
“[I]t is the trial court’s role to resolve any factual dispute bearing on the defendant’s criminal history score.” ().
State v. Terpstra 546 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1996
State v. Terpstra 546 N.W.2d 280 Minn. 1996
State v. Oanes 543 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
State v. Oanes 543 N.W.2d 658 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
See Grilli, 304 Minn, at 89, 91-92, d at 452 (holding predisposition may be shown by evidence of the defendant’s active solicitation of the crime); (noting the defendant must establish the state actor did more than merely solicit the crime), rev’d in part on other grounds
State v. Terpstra 534 N.W.2d 554 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Terpstra 534 N.W.2d 554 Minn. Ct. App. 1995
State v. Goldenstein 505 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
State v. Goldenstein 505 N.W.2d 332 Minn. Ct. App. 1993
We conclude that appellants’ failure to request a special jury interrogatory was “excusable.” , 527 n. 5 (Minn.1986) (failure to object to general verdict of second degree murder, where defendant was also charged with felony murder that was later retroactively reclassified to a lower severity level crime, was excusable where at the time either conviction resulted in the same presumptive sentence).
State v. Murray 495 N.W.2d 412 Minn. 1993
State v. Murray 495 N.W.2d 412 Minn. 1993
State v. Robinson 480 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 1992
State v. Robinson 480 N.W.2d 644 Minn. 1992
State v. Robinson 476 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Robinson 476 N.W.2d 896 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
the supreme court discussed the use of a special interrogatory in a case involving Minn.Stat.
State v. Bluhm 460 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1990
State v. Bluhm 460 N.W.2d 22 Minn. 1990
makes this clear, because we there said, when speaking of the legislature’s classification scheme for receiving stolen property, that “The legislature clearly contemplated that the jury would determine the value of the property within this classification scheme.” The same holds true with respect to t
State v. DeZeler 427 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 1988
State v. DeZeler 427 N.W.2d 231 Minn. 1988
State v. Myers 416 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 1987
State v. Myers 416 N.W.2d 736 Minn. 1987
State v. Belfry 416 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Belfry 416 N.W.2d 811 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
However, Belfry’s criminal liability as to each victim was a “[finding] of fact bearing on sentencing,” which the trial court could make.
State v. Anderson 414 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Anderson 414 N.W.2d 747 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Jones 402 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Jones 402 N.W.2d 231 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Olson was convicted of receiving stolen property in excess of $1,000.
State v. Campa 399 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Campa 399 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Campa 390 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Campa 390 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
the Minnesota Supreme Court stated: Consistent with the rule that it is the trial court's function to make any findings of fact bearing on sentencing, we have held that it is for the trial court to resolve factual disputes bearing on the exercise of its discretion to depart from the presumptive sentence i
State v. Beard 380 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Beard 380 N.W.2d 537 Minn. Ct. App. 1986