Upload a complaint or brief to quickly find on-point case law.
CARA A.I. uses the facts and legal issues in your document to find relevant authorities.
Drag a complaint or brief hereUpload a complaint or briefPDF documentWORD documentTXT documentOr, choose a document to uploadChoose DocumentSecure
Find on-point cases faster with CARA A.I.
§
Depth of Treatment
Newest to Oldest
Oldest to Newest
Cite Count
State v. Givens

310 Citing cases

  1. State v. Misquadace

    644 N.W.2d 65 (Minn. 2002)   Cited 256 times
    Holding that plea agreements cannot form the sole basis of sentencing departure, and modifying State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774 (Minn.1996), which held that a defendant could, by plea agreement, waive sentencing under guidelines

    State v. Misquadace, 629 N.W.2d 487, 490-91 (Minn.App. 2001). The court noted that this court held in State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774 (Minn. 1996), that a defendant could waive sentencing under the guidelines, but that the statute underlying this court's reasoning in Givens was subsequently changed by the legislature. Misquadace, 629 N.W.2d at 490.

  2. Lewis v. State

    697 N.W.2d 624 (Minn. Ct. App. 2005)   Cited 9 times
    Stating that, under Givens, a waiver of the right to be sentenced under the guidelines was knowing, intelligent, and voluntary when "[i]t appear[ed] from the record that the petitioner and his attorney understood the sentence petitioner had agreed to"

    See 658 N.W.2d at 899-900. Appellant also challenges his sentence on the grounds that his waiver of his right to be sentenced under the sentencing guidelines was not knowing, intelligent and voluntary as required by State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 777 (Minn. 1996). That we do not find.

  3. Personal Restraint of Breedlove

    138 Wn. 2d 298 (Wash. 1999)   Cited 80 times
    Holding that the sentencing court must enter findings of fact and conclusions of law explaining reasons for the sentence and remanding for the entry of such findings and conclusions

    Similarly, the Supreme Court of Minnesota has recently held that a criminal defendant may, in a negotiated plea agreement, stipulate to the imposition of a sentence outside the presumptive standard range. State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 777 (Minn. 1996). See also State v. Sims, 553 N.W.2d 58 (Minn.Ct.App. 1996).

  4. State v. Sims

    553 N.W.2d 58 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996)   Cited 9 times
    Concluding that needlessly threatening the victim before eventually killing the victim and then bragging about the murder was deemed particularly cruel

    ISSUE Does the supreme court's holding in State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 776 (Minn. 1996), apply to a defendant sentenced before Givens' release date of March 8, 1996? ANALYSIS

  5. State v. Pletschett

    No. C9-02-393 (Minn. Ct. App. Dec. 17, 2002)

    DECISION Absent a clear abuse of discretion, we will not reverse the district court's decision to depart from the sentencing guidelines. State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 776 (Minn. 1996). Before the district court may depart from the sentencing guidelines, it must articulate substantial and compelling reasons justifying the departure.

  6. Rodriguez v. State

    No. A08-1662 (Minn. Ct. App. Jul. 14, 2009)   Cited 2 times
    Holding that the language "[w]hen the interests of justice require consideration and doing so would not work an unfair surprise on a party" is not sufficient to expressly identify the interests-of-justice exception

    The parties also agreed that appellant would receive a stayed sentence of 42 months. The state explained to the district court that this sentence was an upward durational departure based on State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774 (Minn. 1996), superseded by statute, Minn. Stat. § 244.09, subd. 5(2) (1998), as recognized in State v. Shattuck, 704 N.W.2d 131, 139 n. 5 (Minn. 2005).

  7. State v. Rogers

    No. A03-544 (Minn. Ct. App. Mar. 9, 2004)

    The decision to depart from sentencing guidelines rests within the district court's discretion and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of that discretion. State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 776 (Minn. 1996). In determining whether to depart, a district court must decide "whether the defendant's conduct was significantly more or less serious than that typically involved in the commission of the crime in question."

  8. State v. Misquadace

    629 N.W.2d 487 (Minn. Ct. App. 2001)   Cited 50 times
    Ruling that district court on remand could consider motions to vacate or to modify plea agreement and reconsider its own decision to accept plea agreement when challenged sentences were part of "package" plea agreement

    Six years later, our supreme court decided that a defendant may waive the guidelines sentence through a plea bargain. State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 777 (Minn. 1996). The state relies on Givens for its argument that Misquadace's plea bargain is alone a sufficient basis for the departures.

  9. Kadel v. State

    No. C7-00-2199 (Minn. Ct. App. Apr. 3, 2001)

    See State v. Garcia, 302 N.W.2d 643, 647 (Minn. 1981), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 777 n. 4 (Minn. 1996). A court may impose an upward departure if the crime involves "substantial and compelling aggravating" factors. Minn. Sent. Guidelines cmt. II.D.01; see also Garcia, 302 N.W.2d at 647.

  10. State v. Mcclellan

    No. C5-00-290 (Minn. Ct. App. Aug. 8, 2000)

    The imposition of a sentence lies within the discretion of the district court and we will affirm the sentence absent a clear abuse of that discretion. State v. Givens, 544 N.W.2d 774, 776 (Minn. 1996). McClellan argues that the district court erred in imposing a sentence of 60 months because that duration exceeds the presumptive sentence established by the sentencing guidelines and the court identified no aggravating factors to justify the departure.