Legal Opinion

State v. Broten

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided January 27, 1984No. C1-83-1057PublishedCited by 24 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is a sentencing appeal in which the defendant contends that the trial court erred in computing defendant’s criminal history score and in departing durationally from the presumptive sentence. We affirm this sentence.

Recently, in State v. Broten, 341 N.W.2d 279 (Minn.1983), we affirmed defendant’s conviction of the 1980 burglary of a Roseau store. This appeal concerns defendant’s sentence for conduct occurring early on January 21, 1983, while defendant was on probation in connection with the earlier conviction. Defendant, who is now 39, attended a party on the night…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. State v. GarciaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  2. State v. NortonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  3. State v. ProfitSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
  4. STATE, CTY. OF HENNEPIN v. McClaySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  5. State v. RottSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981

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

3Cited by24 opinions

  1. State v. CrutchfieldCourt of Appeals of Washington · 1989
  2. State v. ChaklosSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1995
  3. State v. HagenCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  4. State v. LeeSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
  5. State v. NorthardCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1984

19 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