Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Trong Kim Huynh, 519 N.W.2d 191.

22 citing documents.

State of Minnesota v. Paul Scott Seeman Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota v. Paul Scott Seeman Minn. Ct. App. 2023
Paulson, d at 907 ( (footnote omitted)).
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
tinct offenses, that the district court could consider the first two convictions in determining the defendant’s criminal-history score for the third conviction); d 477, 484 (Minn. App. 1993) (“[T]he Hernandez method cannot be used to increase a defendant’s criminal history score unless sentencing for more than one offense is permitted under section 609.035.”), aff’d
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
ommon purpose among its m embers; (2) an ongoing and continuing organization, “with its members functioning under some sort of decision making arrangement or structure ”; and (3) activities that “extend beyond the commission of the underlying criminal acts either to coordinate the underlying criminal acts into a pattern of criminal activity or to engage in other activities.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
e people associated with the enterprise; (2) an “ongoing and continuing” organization that functions “under some sort of decision[-]making arrangement or structure”; and (3) the extension of the organization’s activities beyond the underlying criminal acts “either to coordinate the underlying criminal acts into a pattern of criminal activity or to engage in other activities.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
(concluding that multiple offenses occurring over several months arose from single behavioral incident for purposes of section 609.035 because defendant’s “criminal objective was the same” throughout), aff’d, (concluding, on appeal from pre-trial ruling, that multiple offenses occurring at the same time and place but not motivated by single criminal objective did not arise from single behavioral incident).
Barbara Ann Currin, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Longo 909 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Longo 909 N.W.2d 599 Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Huynh , , 196 (Minn. 1994).
State of Minnesota v. Rosalyn Mary Brooks Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Rosalyn Mary Brooks Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Wayne Eilertson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Thomas Wayne Eilertson Minn. Ct. App. 2015
(affirming severity level VIII ranking for defendant’s crime of racketeering, in part because “penalties for racketeering are similar to the penalties for offenses ranked by the Guidelines as severity level VIII offenses, such as first degree assault,” which indicates that the “legislature clearl
State v. Kujak 639 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
State v. Kujak 639 N.W.2d 878 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
Dixon v. Depositors Insurance Co. 619 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
Dixon v. Depositors Insurance Co. 619 N.W.2d 752 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
But appellant fails to plead any facts necessary to fulfill the three-part test for a RICO violation: a common purpose, continuity, and “an ascertainable structure distinct from that inherent in the conduct of a pattern of racketeering activity.” (quoting United States v. Kragness, 830 F.2d 842, 855 (8th Cir. 1987)).
State v. Miller 525 N.W.2d 576 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Miller 525 N.W.2d 576 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
State v. Kelly 519 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 1994
State v. Kelly 519 N.W.2d 202 Minn. 1994