Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 242.27 (2026)
[Repealed]
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official)
Justiaon Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
[Repealed, 1977 c 392 s 14]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13
cases, 1971–1989 · leading case: State v. Siirila, 193 N.W.2d 467 (Minn. 1971).
State v. Siirila, 193 N.W.2d 467 (Minn. 1971). “31, which reads: "Whenever a person committed to the commission upon conviction of a crime is discharged from its control other than by expiration of the maximum term of commitment as provided in Minnesota Statutes, Chapter 242, or by termination of its control under the…”
In Re the Welfare of J.D.P., 439 N.W.2d 725 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). “Minn.Stat. § 242.27 (1971), repealed by 1977 Minn.”
Vezina v. State, 289 N.W.2d 408 (Minn. 1979). “1976, § 242.27. The YCC was abolished in 1973 along with its counterpart for adult offenders, the ACC, and the duties of both bodies were assigned to the Minnesota Corrections Board (MCB).”
DeGidio v. State, 200 N.W.2d 898 (Minn. 1972). “Section 242.27 provides that unless the person in the custody of the YCC is previously discharged or transferred to the ACC, he shall be discharged and be given his liberty on his twenty-fifth birthday regardless of the remaining term of his sentence unless the commission “shall…”
Tucker v. State, 295 N.W.2d 508 (Minn. 1980). “Minn.Stat. § 242.27 (1976) required that at age 25 a youthful offender must be discharged unless the board determines that “discharge at that time would be dangerous to the public.”
State v. R. L. F., 256 N.W.2d 803 (Minn. 1977). “31, which reads as follows: “Whenever a person committed to the board upon conviction of a crime is discharged from its control other than by expiration of the maximum term of commitment as provided in this chapter, or by termination of its control under the provisions of…”
State v. Tyler, 275 N.W.2d 800 (Minn. 1979). “1976, § 242.27, met to determine whether he should be discharged or transferred to adult status to serve the balance of his sentence.”
Rongitsch v. State, 289 N.W.2d 413 (Minn. 1979). “1976, § 242.27 (repealed by L.1977, c. 392, § 14).”
In Re Rlf, 256 N.W.2d 803 (Minn. 1977). “31, which reads as follows: "Whenever a person committed to the board upon conviction of a crime is discharged from its control other than by expiration of the maximum term of commitment as provided in this chapter, or by termination of its control under the provisions of…”
Johnson v. State, 295 N.W.2d 550 (Minn. 1980). “The issue on appeal is whether the state met its burden of proving that an absolute discharge of Johnson would be “dangerous to the public” within the meaning of Minn.Stat. § 242.27 (1976). Holding that the state did meet its burden, we affirm.”
Riley v. State, 294 N.W.2d 709 (Minn. 1980). “Minn.Stat. § 242.27 (1976). The act also provided that the board hold a hearing to review its decision if requested and for judicial review of the board’s decision: (1) Within 30 days from the date of notice in writing of any order made pursuant to section 242.”
Goodwin v. State, 307 N.W.2d 498 (Minn. 1981). “The key issue on appeal is whether the state met its burden of proving that an absolute discharge of Goodwin from the sentences which formed the basis of his commitment under the Youth Conservation Act would be “dangerous to the public” within the meaning of Minn.Stat. § 242.27…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.