Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 242. CORRECTIONS; JUVENILES
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 242.36 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ text as last checked Sept. 2026 (this copy records no edition or section history)
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[Repealed, 1977 c 392 s 14]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 6 cases, 1970–1980 · leading case: Vezina v. State, 289 N.W.2d 408 (Minn. 1979).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Vezina v. State, 289 N.W.2d 408 (Minn. 1979). · cites it 2× “1976, § 242.36. The statute provided that within 30 days from the notice of transfer the person transferred had to make a written request for a hearing.”
State v. Tyler, 275 N.W.2d 800 (Minn. 1979). · cites it 3× “In 1977, the remaining provisions of the youth act were repealed and the significance of reaching age 25 for the consideration of the question of discharge was eliminated.”
Tucker v. State, 295 N.W.2d 508 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 2× “Tucker petitioned for a de novo review of the order in district court pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 242.36 (1976). On June 20,1979, the court affirmed the transfer order.”
DeGidio v. State, 200 N.W.2d 898 (Minn. 1972). “” Although there appears no specific provisions requiring the commission to issue an order of termination and transfer, § 242.36, 3 by clear implication, requires that a written order be issued and notice thereof be given to the defendant.”
Welfare of Loyd v. Youth Conservation Comm'n, 177 N.W.2d 555 (Minn. 1970). · cites it 4× “Appellant asserts that by limiting these review provisions to juveniles committed to the commission after conviction of a felony or gross misdemeanor, § 242.36 effectively denies the same rights to juveniles committed to the commission after adjudication of delinquency, and thus…”
Riley v. State, 294 N.W.2d 709 (Minn. 1980). · cites it 4× “Minn.Stat. § 242.36 (1976). There can be no dispute that full due process was required at the board hearing.”
Minn. Stat. § 242.36(3): 1 case
State v. Tyler, 275 N.W.2d 800 (Minn. 1979). “In 1977, the remaining provisions of the youth act were repealed and the significance of reaching age 25 for the consideration of the question of discharge was eliminated.”
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.