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. Larson 379 N.W.2d 165 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Aarsvold 376 N.W.2d 518 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Aarsvold 376 N.W.2d 518 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
    The supreme court has since stated that a “typical felony-murder * * * probably is an unintentional killing that occurs in the course of robbery or some other crime against the person.”
  • State v. Halverson 373 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Halverson 373 N.W.2d 618 Minn. Ct. App. 1985
  • State v. Campbell 367 N.W.2d 454 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Peake 366 N.W.2d 299 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Campbell 367 N.W.2d 454 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Peake 366 N.W.2d 299 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Winchell 363 N.W.2d 747 Minn. 1985
  • State v. Winchell 363 N.W.2d 747 Minn. 1985
    (trial court departed durationally from presumptive sentence for a felony murder in sentencing man who went on shooting spree that resulted in death of woman who was on her porch when struck; since invasion of victim’s residential privacy was not element of offense of felony murder, it was proper for court
  • State v. Dillard 355 N.W.2d 167 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Dillard 355 N.W.2d 167 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Massey v. State 352 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • Massey v. State 352 N.W.2d 487 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Andren 347 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Andren 347 N.W.2d 846 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    (refusal to make, dispositional departure and place defendant on probation); -8 (Minn.1981); (refusal to make dispo-s
  • State v. Wallner 346 N.W.2d 386 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Wallner 346 N.W.2d 386 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Kisch 346 N.W.2d 130 Minn. 1984
  • State v. Kisch 346 N.W.2d 130 Minn. 1984
    “If there is such a thing as a typical felony-murder, it probably is an unintentional killing that occurs in the course of robbery or some other crime against the person.” d at 276-77 .
  • State v. Pickett 343 N.W.2d 670 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Pickett 343 N.W.2d 670 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    : ⅜ * * ordinarily we will not interfere with a sentence that falls within the presumptive sentence range even if there are grounds that would justify departure.
  • State v. Nash 342 N.W.2d 177 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
  • State v. Nash 342 N.W.2d 177 Minn. Ct. App. 1984
    The Minnesota Supreme Court has interpreted this language as meaning, “that the trial court has broad discretion and that we generally will not interfere with the exercise of that discretion.”
  • State v. Sherwood 341 N.W.2d 574 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
  • State v. Sherwood 341 N.W.2d 574 Minn. Ct. App. 1983
    As noted by the Supreme Court, “ordinarily we will not interfere with a sentence that falls within the presumptive sentence range even if there are grounds that would justify departure.” at 275 (Minn.1983).