Legal Opinion

State v. Borg

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided November 5, 2012No. A09-1921PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

STAUBER, Judge.

On appeal from an order reducing the amount of restitution by $837.10, the state argues that the district court erred by holding a restitution hearing, considering respondent’s restitution challenges, and amending the restitution order, because respondent failed to challenge restitution within the 30-day time period allowed by Minn.Stat. § 611A.045 (2008). Respondent argues that the state’s challenge is not reviewable by this court because the state is not entitled to appellate review of the restitution order. Because the rules of criminal procedure do not allow the…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
  2. State v. RourkeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2009
  3. State v. BarrettSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
  4. In Re the Welfare of C. W. S.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  5. State v. BorgSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011

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

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. State v. BorgSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2013
  2. State v. MaddoxCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2013

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

Powered by the Exa API