Minn. Stat. » CHAPTER 260. JUVENILE COURT; CHILD PLACEMENT; COMPACTS
Minnesota Statutes

Minn. Stat. § 260.125 (2026)

[Repealed]

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MN-REVrevisor.mn.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

MS 1998 [Repealed, 1999 c 139 art 4 s 3]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 86 cases, 1949–2017 · leading case: In Re the Welfare of K.A.A., 410 N.W.2d 836 (Minn. 1987).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
In Re the Welfare of K.A.A., 410 N.W.2d 836 (Minn. 1987). · cites it 50× “The two exceptions to this legislatively created exclusive jurisdiction occurred (1) if the juvenile is referred by the juvenile court to the district court for trial as an adult (Minn.Stat. § 260.125 (1986)), and (2) if the alleged delinquent offense involved minor traffic…”
State v. Behl, 564 N.W.2d 560 (Minn. 1997). · cites it 20× “See Minn.Stat. § 260.125 (1996) (establishing system for certification of juvenile to district court).”
In Re Welfare of D.M.D., 607 N.W.2d 432 (Minn. 2000). · cites it 40× “See Minn.Stat. § 260.125, subd. 2b (1998). Nevertheless, the court found that EJJ designation was warranted, due primarily to the state's psychologists' testimony that EJJ was necessary for the full treatment of respondent.”
State v. Mitchell, 577 N.W.2d 481 (Minn. 1998). · cites it 19× “" Minn.Stat. § 260.125, subd. 4 (1996). Further, the sentencing guidelines provide that sentences apply with the same presumptive force to a child who has been certified as an adult as they would to one who was 18 or older at the time of the crime.”
In Re the Welfare of S.J.G., 547 N.W.2d 456 (Minn. Ct. App. 1996). · cites it 35× “" After considering the factors set out in Minn.Stat. § 260.125, subd. 2b (1994), Dr.”
In Re the Welfare of J.L.B., 435 N.W.2d 595 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989). · cites it 16× “Minn.Stat. § 260.125, subd. 2 (1988); Matter of Welfare of D.”
In Re the Welfare of D.T.H., 572 N.W.2d 742 (Minn. Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 19× “See Minn.Stat. § 260.125, subd. 2a (1996) (presuming certification when offense is felony using gun or offense with guidelines presumptive prison sentence).”
In Re the Welfare of D.F.B., 433 N.W.2d 79 (Minn. 1988). · cites it 11× “’s petition for review not because we disagree with the ultimate decision of the court of appeals but in order to provide a different analysis as to why reference is required.”
In Re the Welfare of L.J.S., 539 N.W.2d 408 (Minn. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 14× “See Minn.Stat. §§ 260.125, subd. 2a, 260.126, subd.”
In Re the Welfare of D.M., 373 N.W.2d 845 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 22× “After a hearing on the State’s motion, the juvenile court issued an order finding that the State had made a prima facie case for adult reference pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 260.125, subd. 3(1)(a) (1984) based solely upon the delinquency petition.”
In Re the Welfare of C.A.N., 370 N.W.2d 438 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985). · cites it 15× “Minn.Stat. § 260.125, subd. 2(c); Minn.R.”
Matter of Welfare of Haaland, 346 N.W.2d 190 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984). · cites it 13× “1, of the Minnesota Rules for Juvenile Courts, and (2) that the state failed to present a prima facie case pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 260.125, sub. 3 (1982). Issues 1.”
Show all 86 citing cases →
— Minn. Stat. § 260.125(2)(d) — 1 case
Kelly Patrick Hartung v. Donald Omodt, 687 F.2d 1230 (8th Cir. 1982).
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.