DocketDrift

Real-time tracking of state judicial trends.

Explore

Outcomes

Public record · Human review · No verdicts asserted

Cited by

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

177 citing documents.

  • State v. Jones 733 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
  • State v. Jones 733 N.W.2d 160 Minn. Ct. App. 2007
    Rather, the question for the district court “in deciding whether to depart durationally is whether the defendant’s conduct was significantly more or less serious than that typically involved in the commission of the crime in question.”
  • State v. Heden 719 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 2006
  • State v. Heden 719 N.W.2d 689 Minn. 2006
    See Anderson, d *697 at 701 (holding that firearm possession charges cannot serve as a predicate for second-degree felony murder because possession of a firearm is not inherently dangerous); (concluding that a property offense can support a second-degree felony murder conviction if it involves special danger to human life).
  • State v. Blanche 696 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2005
  • State v. Blanche 696 N.W.2d 351 Minn. 2005
  • State v. Beaty 696 N.W.2d 406 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
  • State v. Beaty 696 N.W.2d 406 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
    serious than that typically involved in the commission of the crime in question.”
  • State v. Mitchell 693 N.W.2d 891 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
  • State v. Mitchell 693 N.W.2d 891 Minn. Ct. App. 2005
    The supreme court subsequently interpreted the 1981 statutory amendment to mean that “the felony-murder rule can be used even when the underlying felony is a property offense if that offense, as committed, involves special danger to human life.”
  • State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Bertsch 689 N.W.2d 276 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Bendzula 675 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
  • State v. Bendzula 675 N.W.2d 920 Minn. Ct. App. 2004
    *925 (permitting consideration of sentences of co-defendants and other offenders).
  • Taylor v. State 670 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 2003
  • State v. Anderson 666 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2003
  • State v. Anderson 666 N.W.2d 696 Minn. 2003
  • State v. Anderson 654 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
  • State v. Anderson 654 N.W.2d 367 Minn. Ct. App. 2002
    See, (shoplifting); (damage to property); (sale of narcotics); (sale of narcotics).
  • State v. Thao 649 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2002
  • State v. Thao 649 N.W.2d 414 Minn. 2002
  • State v. Morris 609 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
  • State v. Morris 609 N.W.2d 242 Minn. Ct. App. 2000
  • State v. Sanders 598 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Sanders 598 N.W.2d 650 Minn. 1999
  • Smith v. State 596 N.W.2d 661 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • Smith v. State 596 N.W.2d 661 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    Minn. Stat. § 609.19 (2); (noting second-degree felony murder revised to apply to all but specific felony exceptions); 9 Henry W. McCarr, Minnesota Practice § 54.2, ' at 225-26 (2d ed.1990) ( and noting felony murder rule can be used with any underlying felony, including property offenses); see also Minn.Stat.
  • State v. Jackson 596 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
  • State v. Jackson 596 N.W.2d 262 Minn. Ct. App. 1999
    In deciding whether the circumstances support a departure from a presumptive sentence, the trial court focuses on “whether the defendant’s conduct was significantly more or less serious than that typically involved in the commission of the crime in question.”
  • State v. Spain 590 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Spain 590 N.W.2d 85 Minn. 1999
  • State v. Hough 585 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Hough 585 N.W.2d 393 Minn. 1998
  • State v. Behl 573 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
  • State v. Behl 573 N.W.2d 711 Minn. Ct. App. 1998
    For example, -77 (Minn.1983), review denied (Minn. Oct.
  • Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
  • Rairdon v. State 557 N.W.2d 318 Minn. 1996
    A sentencing court should consider whether the defendant’s conduct was “significantly more or less serious than that typically involved in the commission of the crime in question.”
  • State v. Evenson 554 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
  • State v. Evenson 554 N.W.2d 409 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
  • State v. Esler 553 N.W.2d 61 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
  • State v. Esler 553 N.W.2d 61 Minn. Ct. App. 1996
    1 the trial court concluded that this factor was especially troubling because a person should be able to feel secure from outside harm when in the home.
  • State v. Smith 541 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Cole 542 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Smith 541 N.W.2d 584 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Cole 542 N.W.2d 43 Minn. 1996
  • State v. Chaklos 528 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Chaklos 528 N.W.2d 225 Minn. 1995
  • State v. Bauerly 520 N.W.2d 760 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • State v. Bauerly 520 N.W.2d 760 Minn. Ct. App. 1994
  • State v. Bates 507 N.W.2d 847 Minn. Ct. App. 1993