Legal Opinion

State v. Anderson

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided December 4, 1990No. C3-90-253PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

HUSPENI, Judge.

Appellant alleges that imposition of a double durational departure and consecutive sentences based on his conviction for first and second degree assault was an abuse of discretion and effectively negated the jury’s verdict. Appellant also alleges that the trial court erred in not granting him a downward departure. We affirm.

FACTS

Appellant, Randy Anderson, worked as a security guard and had obtained a permit to carry a weapon while working. On the night of June 13, 1989, appellant and his fiancee entertained another couple and their child. When the couple left at about…

2Cases cited12 opinions

  1. State v. KindemSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  2. State v. EvansSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  3. State v. SchantzenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1981
  4. State v. CoxSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  5. State v. Van GordenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1994
  2. State v. RourkeCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
  3. State v. Tze ThaoCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2001
  4. State v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API