Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. O'BRIEN, 369 N.W.2d 525.

46 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State v. O’Brien, - 27 (Minn. 1985).
Juan Humberto Castillo-Alvarez, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
at 623 (“An upward departure may be supported based on the presence of a single aggravating factor.” (citing State v. O’Brien, d 525, 527 (Minn. 1985))).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2025
(citing State v. O’Brien, (stating that the presence of a single aggravating factor is sufficient to support an upward departure); Dillon, d at 599).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State v. O’Brien, -27 (Minn. 1985).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
See, e.g., Meyers, d at 902 (upholding 240- month sentence where 135 months was presumed); (upholding 1 40 month-sentence where 70 months was presumed); State v. 10 O’Brien, (upholding 130-month sentence where 65 months was presumed).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
1(e)(i); 10 Minnesota Practice, CRIMJIG 12.03 (2015); see also State v. O’Brien, (“The elements of [first- degree criminal sexual conduct] are (1) penetration, (2) personal injury to the victim, and (3) penetration accomplished through force or coercion.”), aff’d as modified, d 525 (Minn. 1985).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Cf. State v. O’Brien, ( upholding an upward durational departure and noting that “[a]n age difference of 7 years when the victim is only 14 and the defendant 21 is more significant than it would be if the victim were an adult”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. O’Brien, aff’d as modified
State of Minnesota v. George Cornelius Watkins Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. George Cornelius Watkins Minn. Ct. App. 2015
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
d 409, 410 (Minn. 1989); State v. O’Brien
State of Minnesota v. Javonate James McNeal Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Javonate James McNeal Minn. Ct. App. 2015
−60 (Minn. App. 2011) (citing State v. O’Brien, and upholding upward-departure sentence when “at least one of the aggravating circumstances stated by the district court [wa]s supported by the record”), review denied (Minn. Sept.
State of Minnesota v. Rafael Antonio Alfaro Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State of Minnesota v. Rafael Antonio Alfaro Minn. Ct. App. 2014
(citing State v. O’Brien, d 525, 527 (Minn. 1985), and upholding upward-departure sentence when “at least one of the aggravating circumstances stated by the district court [was] supported by the record”), review denied (Minn. Sept.
State v. Ayala-Leyva 848 N.W.2d 546 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Ayala-Leyva 848 N.W.2d 546 Minn. Ct. App. 2014
State v. Rushton 820 N.W.2d 287 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Castillo-Alvarez 820 N.W.2d 601 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Castillo-Alvarez 820 N.W.2d 601 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. O’Brien, (stating that the presence of a single aggravating factor is sufficient to support upward departure); see also Dillon, d at 599 (same).
State v. Rushton 820 N.W.2d 287 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Petersen 799 N.W.2d 653 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Petersen 799 N.W.2d 653 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
See State v. O’Brien, (stating that the presence of a single aggravating factor is sufficient to uphold an upward departure).
State v. Robideau 783 N.W.2d 390 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Robideau 783 N.W.2d 390 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
See, e.g., State v. O’Brien, review denied (Minn. June 15, 1994).
Dillon v. State 781 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Dillon v. State 781 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
See, e.g., State v. O’Brien, (upholding double durational departure when only one aggravating factor was present); (holding that particular cruelty alone can justify double departure), review denied (Minn. June 15,1994).
State v. Mohamed 779 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Mohamed 779 N.W.2d 93 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Traylor 641 N.W.2d 335 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Traylor 641 N.W.2d 335 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
D.2.b.(2); State v. O’Brien, (concluding that severe emotional distress was a valid basis for departure in first-degree criminal sexual conduct sentencing); (concluding that the underlying course of conduct may be considered in a departure decision, including psychological tormen
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
State v. Hart 477 N.W.2d 732 Minn. Ct. App. 1991
l(e)(i) are penetration, personal injury, and force or coercion), aff'd as modified
State v. Doughman 404 N.W.2d 867 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
State v. Doughman 404 N.W.2d 867 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
Further, the offense was committed in a particularly serious way, State v. O’Brien, which represented a greater than normal danger to the safety of other people.
State v. Edmison 398 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Edmison 398 N.W.2d 584 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See, e.g., State v. O’Brien, pet.
State v. Johnston 390 N.W.2d 451 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Johnston 390 N.W.2d 451 Minn. Ct. App. 1986