Cited by

Opinions in Minnesota that cite State v. Back, 341 N.W.2d 273.

177 citing documents.

State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Misti Dawn Nelson Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
( stating that “we will not interfere with a sentence that falls within the presumptive sentence range even if there are grounds that would justify departure”).
Luke Joshua Cain, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Roger Lee Voss, III Minn. Ct. App. 2026
State of Minnesota v. Roger Lee Voss, III Minn. Ct. App. 2026
(“[W]e will not interfere with a sentence that falls within the presumptive sentence range even if there are grounds that would justify departure.”).
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Dawn Oliver Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Lisa Dawn Oliver Minn. Ct. App. 2024
is peculiarly a legislative and not a judicial function.” (quotation omitted)), rev. denied (Minn. July 19, 2011); (rejecting argument that challenged the absence of a distinction in the sentencing guidelines between two offenses that involved D-6 different levels of culpability because the classification of those crimes “is a legislative decision”).
State of Minnesota v. Camille Lashay Dennis-Bond Minn. Ct. App. 2024
State of Minnesota v. Camille Lashay Dennis-Bond Minn. Ct. App. 2024
(“[W]e will not interfere with a sentence that falls within the presumptive sentence range even if there are grounds that would justify departure.”).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2021
14 ), review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
This court may also “reduce a defendant’s sentence in order to make it more equitable with the sentence that a similarly situated codefendant received.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2020
10 This court may “reduce a defendant’s sentence in order to make it more equitable with the sentence that a similarly situated codefendant received.”
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
Although remorse usually is offered in support of a request for a downward dispositional departure, it also may be offered to support a request for a downward durational departure, -26 (Minn. 2016).
State of Minnesota, Respondent, Minn. Ct. App. 2019
State v. Back , review denied (Minn. Oct.
State of Minnesota v. Dionte Gosa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Eric Toney Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Dionte Gosa Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Eric Toney Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Miles Solberg 882 N.W.2d 618 Minn. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Miles Solberg 882 N.W.2d 618 Minn. 2016
(“As a general rule, a defendant’s remorse bears only on a decision whether or not to depart dispositionally, not on a decision to depart durationally .
State of Minnesota v. Charles Kenneth Redding Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Charles Kenneth Redding Minn. Ct. App. 2016
(stating that “[a]s a general rule, a defendant’s remorse bears only on a decision whether or not to depart dispositionally, not on a decision to depart durationally”).
State of Minnesota v. Zaki Mohamed Sugule Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Zaki Mohamed Sugule Minn. Ct. App. 2016
State of Minnesota v. Alonzo Crowder Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Alonzo Crowder Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Miles Solberg 869 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Jacob Miles Solberg 869 N.W.2d 66 Minn. Ct. App. 2015
Respondent asserts that his remorse was a proper, sufficient factor to justify a downward durational departure.3 Generally, “a defendant’s remorse bears only on a decision whether or not to depart dispositionally, not on a decision to depart durationally.”
State of Minnesota v. Parnard Smith, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Shannon Marie Kiesner Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Shannon Marie Kiesner Minn. Ct. App. 2015
.” d 273, 275 (Minn. 1983).
State of Minnesota v. Parnard Smith, Jr. Minn. Ct. App. 2015
A defendant’s remorse, as a general rule, “bears only on a decision whether or not to depart dispositionally.”
State of Minnesota v. Bradley James Schnickel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Bradley James Schnickel Minn. Ct. App. 2015
“As a general rule, a defendant’s remorse bears only on a decision whether or not to depart dispositionally, not on a decision to depart durationally.”
State of Minnesota v. Leroy Lamar Morris Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Leroy Lamar Morris Minn. Ct. App. 2015
.” (listing “the defendant’s age, his prior record, his remorse, his cooperation, his attitude 7 while in court, and the support of friends and/or family” as factors “relevant to a determination whe
State of Minnesota v. Leann Bobleter Sargent Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State of Minnesota v. Leann Bobleter Sargent Minn. Ct. App. 2015
State v. Peter 825 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
State v. Peter 825 N.W.2d 126 Minn. Ct. App. 2012
On the other hand, offense-related aggravating factors may be used to support not only such a dispositional departure but, alternatively, an upward durational departure.”); (holding that likelihood of future criminal behavior is not valid reason for durational departure); (holding that post-offense remorse is not appropriate factor for durational departure); (holding that age and lack of a felony record are not valid bases for dura-tional departures), review denied (Minn. Oct.
State v. Weaver 796 N.W.2d 561 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
State v. Weaver 796 N.W.2d 561 Minn. Ct. App. 2011
“The general issue that faces a [district] court in deciding whether to depart dura-tionally is whether the defendant’s conduct was significantly more or less serious than that typically involved in the commission of the crime in question.”
Dillon v. State 781 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
Dillon v. State 781 N.W.2d 588 Minn. Ct. App. 2010
State v. Edwards 774 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 2009
State v. Edwards 774 N.W.2d 596 Minn. 2009
State v. Smoot 737 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
State v. Smoot 737 N.W.2d 849 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
See Anderson, d at 699 -700 (-77 (Minn.1983), ).