Legal Opinion

State v. Wall

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 20, 1984No. C6-83-941PublishedCited by 28 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is a sentencing appeal in which the defendant contends that the trial court erred in departing durationally from the presumptive sentence. We agree and reduce defendant’s sentence to the maximum sentence that could have been imposed without departure, in this case 121 months.

Defendant was charged by indictment with first-degree murder in the strangling death of his wife. He was permitted to plead guilty to the lesser" included offense of second-degree felony murder, Minn.Stat. § 609.19(2) (1982). The presumptive sentence for the offense (a severity level X offense)…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. State v. KindemSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  2. State v. GardnerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  3. State v. HeywoodSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983
  4. State v. SchmitSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1983

3Cited by28 opinions

  1. State v. HennumSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  2. State v. PegelCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
  3. State v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
  4. State v. McLaughlinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  5. State v. WilsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995

23 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