Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Rhodes, 675 N.W.2d 323.

88 citing documents.

Ricardo Daniel Peralta Gutierrez, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
Lastly, after the district court imposed the sentence of 144 month’s imprisonment, it asked Peralta Gutierrez if it missed anything regarding the sentencing order; defense counsel responded, “No, Your Honor.” To support its claim, -27 (Minn. 2004), which involved a petition for postconviction relief that sought to withdraw a guilty plea.
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Michael Lewis Minn. Ct. App. 2025
State of Minnesota v. Matthew Michael Lewis Minn. Ct. App. 2025
In other words, the defendant must have “knowledge that the sentence actually imposed could be imposed.”
Alan Joseph Zakrajshek v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Omar Kwabena Walford v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Alan Joseph Zakrajshek v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Omar Kwabena Walford v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
But a defendant may seek to withdraw a guilty plea at any time when “withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice.” (quoting Minn. R. Crim.
Tescil Romalis Mason-Kimmons v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Tescil Romalis Mason-Kimmons v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2024
Precisely what sentence was bargained for as part of the plea agreement “is a factual inquiry for the [district] court to resolve.”
Timothy Richard Gilles, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
“A manifest injustice exists if the plea is not accurate, voluntary and intelligent.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2023
-49 (Minn. 2001) (concluding that there was no due-process violation when a sentence modification resulted in a five-year conditional-release period).
Stephen Dontrail Thornton, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
State v. Rhodes , 326-327 (Minn. 2004) (distinguishing Wukawitz and Jumping Eagle because “the conditional release term was not mentioned at the sentencing hearing or included in the 13 initial sentence” and specifically quoting the portion of Wukawitz that limited the holding “to those situations where the original sente
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
Id.; (quoting Standards for Crim.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
In other words, the defendant must have “knowledge that the sentence actually imposed could be imposed.” State v. Rhodes , (quoting Standards for Crim.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2022
The state relies on State v. Rhodes , to argue otherwise.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
(applying de novo review to the “interpretation and enforcement of plea agreements”).
Abdirizak Ahmed Gayre, Relator, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
d 323, 326 (Minn. 2004).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
A20-0458 Minn. Ct. App. 2021
Elfonzo Dyrell Shelby, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
The supreme court rejected an ar gument similar to appellant’s
Johnny Hernandez Perez, petitioner, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
“Determining what the parties agreed to in a plea bargain is a factual inquiry for the postconviction court to resolve.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State of Minnesota, Appellant, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
Withdrawal of a guilty plea is allowed when the request is timely made and “withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injusti ce.” State v. Rhodes , (citing Minn. R. Crim.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2018
State v. Montez , (citing State v. Rhodes , ).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2017
6 that [appellate courts] review de novo.” State v. Rhodes
State v. Montez 899 N.W.2d 200 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State v. Montez 899 N.W.2d 200 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Thong v. State 892 N.W.2d 842 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
Thong v. State 892 N.W.2d 842 Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Chaz Jacobi Beckman Minn. Ct. App. 2017
State of Minnesota v. Chaz Jacobi Beckman Minn. Ct. App. 2017
4 686, 707 (Minn. 2008) ().
State of Minnesota v. Melissa Rae Guillette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Melissa Rae Guillette Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Joseph Michael Smith v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Joseph Michael Smith v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
“Determining what the parties agreed to in a plea bargain is a factual inquiry for the postconviction court to resolve.”
State of Minnesota v. William James Chestnut Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. William James Chestnut Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Aaron Arnold Lind-Pashina Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Aaron Arnold Lind-Pashina Minn. Ct. App. 2016
DECISION The “interpretation and enforcement of plea agreements involve issues of law that we review de novo.”
Craig Allan Hargreaves v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016
Craig Allan Hargreaves v. State of Minnesota Minn. Ct. App. 2016