Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Winchell, 363 N.W.2d 747.

71 citing documents.

Hamilton v. State 398 N.W.2d 680 Minn. Ct. App. 1987
(sentencing court not required to accept defendant’s version of the crime as stated at a guilty plea hearing).
State v. Litzinger 391 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Litzinger 391 N.W.2d 82 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
See, -51 (Minn.1985) (zone of privacy; presence of young children); -55 (Minn.1982) (concealment of victim’s body).
State v. Gelhar 392 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Gelhar 392 N.W.2d 609 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
The aggravated sentence was justified because the crime was committed in the victim’s home, violating her zone of privacy, because the victim was particularly vulnerable, Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.D.2.b.(1); and because of the particular cruelty inflicted on the victim for which appellant should be held responsible.
State v. Finn 391 N.W.2d 55 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Finn 391 N.W.2d 55 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Johnston 390 N.W.2d 451 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Johnston 390 N.W.2d 451 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Alston 391 N.W.2d 2 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Alston 391 N.W.2d 2 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Campa 390 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Campa 390 N.W.2d 333 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Titworth 381 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Titworth 381 N.W.2d 510 Minn. Ct. App. 1986
State v. Olson 379 N.W.2d 524 Minn. 1986
State v. Nesler 376 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Nesler 376 N.W.2d 745 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
the supreme court rejected an identical claim made by the defendant.
State v. Anderson 370 N.W.2d 703 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
State v. Anderson 370 N.W.2d 703 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
Further, the assault took place in the presence of the victim’s children, which is a “particularly outrageous act.”
State v. O'BRIEN 364 N.W.2d 901 Minn. Ct. App. 1985