| a241128 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2026-01-26 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Romaine Anthony Reid
|
|
… 2 filed a Blakely motion seeking an upward aggravated sentencing departure based on the alleged aggravating factor of multiple forms of penetration. 1 By February 23, 2023, when Reid appeared for a domesti …
|
| a230134 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2023-12-04 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Devin Lee Arola Johnson
|
|
… by imposing consecutive stayed prison sentences without stating reasons for a sentencing departure. Therefore, we affirm Arola Johnson’s convictions but reverse the imposition of consecutive stayed prison sentences and remand for imposi …
|
| A16-392 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2017-01-17 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Peter Clare Hoagland
|
|
… I.D.2.b (1992). “Generally, the district court may impose an upward durational sentencing departure if the evidence shows that the defendant committed the offense in a particularly serious way.” State v. Hicks, 864 N.W.2d 153, 157 (Minn. …
|
| A15-1607 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-12-12 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Bryan Blocker
|
|
… he course of the kidnapping. Respondent State of Minnesota moved for an upward sentencing departure, and the district court submitted a special verdict form to the jury with ten questions to find the existence of aggravating facts. The j …
|
| A15-1417 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-10-05 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Devon Derrick Parker
|
|
… hange of venue, and (2) abused its discretion by imposing an upward durational sentencing departure based on the fact that the crime occurred in the victim’s zone of privacy. Because the district court acted within its discretion in denyi …
|
| A15-1247 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-07-18 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota, (A15-1247), (A15-1255) v. Randall Samuel Stempfley, (A15-1247), (A15-…
|
|
… me Court adopted the following general rules governing when a district court’s sentencing departure may be affirmed or reversed: 1. If no reasons for departure are stated on the record at the time of sen …
|
| A15-870 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2016-05-23 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Doan Meshell Engel
|
|
… ohibiting certain testimony, (4) abused its discretion by declining a downward sentencing departure, (5) erred by entering convictions for both assault counts; and (6) abused its discretion by awarding restitution. We affirm in part, rev …
|
| A15-102 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-12-07 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Michael Robert Robinson
|
|
… nt’s motion to withdraw his guilty plea or by declining to impose a durational sentencing departure, we affirm in part. But because the district court erred by basing its sentence on an incorrect criminal-history score, we reverse in par …
|
| A14-1891 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-11-02 |
Affirmed in part
|
State of Minnesota v. Benjamin Paul Adams
|
|
… III. The state gave notice that it was seeking an aggravated sentencing departure on the grounds of particular cruelty, but did not give notice as to which offense was committed with particular cruelty. Appellant object …
|
| A15-23 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-10-19 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Duane Thomas Mizner
|
|
… , and we conclude, that because the district court did not state grounds for a sentencing departure, Mizner’s fourth-degree criminal-sexual-conduct sentence should have been concurrent to his previously imposed second-degree-assault sent …
|
| A14-1670 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-09-08 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Michael John Mangan
|
|
… ial to determine if any aggravating factors were present which would warrant a sentencing departure. At sentencing, the state sought an upward departure from the sentencing guidelines based on the evidence of appellant’s preparation and …
|
| A14-422 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-03-02 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Jared Armand Cobb
|
|
… nce of the victim’s previous sexual conduct; (2) imposing an upward durational sentencing departure; and (3) imposing a lifetime conditional-release term. We affirm the district court’s exclusion of evidence and the upward sentencing dep …
|
| A13-2312 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-02-23 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Justin Thadeus Amick
|
|
… than the presumptive sentence”). “[A]bsent a statement of the reasons for the sentencing departure placed on the record at the time of sentencing, no departure will be allowed.” State v. Geller, 665 N.W.2d 514, 517 (Minn. 2003). …
|
| A14-141 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2015-01-20 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. Wayne William Leistico
|
|
… t it would be introducing evidence of aggravating factors to support an upward sentencing departure. Two of the factors were that the crime was committed within the victim’s zone of privacy and that Leistico forced the child to engage in …
|
| A13-2038 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2014-12-01 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. William Alan Fellner
|
|
… ealment.” He also challenges the district court’s upward dispositional sentencing departure. We affirm the conviction, but we reverse the sentence and remand for resentencing. FACTS …
|
| A13-1774 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2014-10-14 |
Affirmed in part
|
State of Minnesota v. Joseph Michael Tuseth
|
|
… idelines contain a nonexclusive list of aggravating factors that may justify a sentencing departure. Minn. Sent. Guidelines 2.D.3.b (2012). If the reasons given for the “departure are legally permissible and factually supported in the rec …
|
| A14-165 |
Minn. Ct. App. |
2014-10-06 |
Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded
|
State of Minnesota v. David Eugene Nelson
|
|
… tor,” and “[a] double durational departure is generally the ‘upper limit’ of a sentencing departure.” State v. Ayala-Leyva, 848 N.W.2d 546, 558 (Minn. App. 2014), review granted on other grounds (Minn. Aug. 5, 2014). But “[w]hile courts …
|