Legal Opinion

State v. Gaiovnik

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided March 9, 2011No. A09-190PublishedCited by 40 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

*645OPINION

GILDEA, Chief Justice.

The question presented in this case is whether the district court violated Minn. Stat. § 611A.04, subd. 1(a) (2010), when it ordered appellant Christopher Gaiovnik (Gaiovnik) to pay restitution to a victim when the victim did not request restitution. Because we conclude that the district court’s authority to order restitution is not limited to those situations where a victim submits a request for restitution, we affirm.

On December 10, 2007, Gaiovnik and his accomplice, Christopher Landvik, robbed two employees of Hollister, a clothing store located in the Rosedale…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Christensen v. Hennepin Transportation Co. Inc.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1943
  2. In Re the Civil Commitment of GiemSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  3. State v. FaderSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  4. State Ex Rel. Doe v. MadonnaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  5. State v. HendersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005

4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by40 opinions

  1. State of Minnesota v. Brandon Wayne RiggsSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
  2. State v. CampbellSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  3. United States v. Randall JenningsCourt of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit · 2017
  4. In the Matter of REICHMANN LAND AND CATTLE, LLPSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
  5. Harry Jerome Evans v. State of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016

35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API