Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 609.155 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1978 c 723 art 1 s 19]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 20
cases, 1964–1993 · leading case: State v. Adams, 295 N.W.2d 527 (Minn. 1980).
State v. Adams, 295 N.W.2d 527 (Minn. 1980). “Defendant John Lewis Adams appeals his conviction of murder in the third degree and his sentence as a dangerous offender pursuant to Minn.Stat. §§ 609.155 and 609.16 (1978). Defendant challenges his conviction on the grounds that his request for a lesser included offense…”
State v. Michaud, 276 N.W.2d 73 (Minn. 1979). “Louis County Attorney filed notice informing defendant that extended-term sentencing would be sought as provided by §§ 609.155 1 and 609.16. 2 *75 After hearing, defendant, on April 22,1977, was sentenced under § 609.”
State v. Plan, 316 N.W.2d 727 (Minn. 1982). “The court also found that defendant was a dangerous offender under Minn.Stat. §§ 609.155 and 609.16 (1978). 1 On this appeal from judgment of conviction, defendant challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to establish that he intentionally killed the victim, argues that the…”
Whitehead v. State, 498 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 1986). “See Minn. Stat. §§ 609.155 , 609.16 (1976). That statute, however, was repealed in anticipation of Minnesota's adoption of uniform sentencing guidelines.”
State v. Christie, 506 N.W.2d 293 (Minn. 1993). “1980), the court made findings under this lesser standard when determining whether a defendant should be sentenced under Minn.Stat. §§ 609.155 and 609.16 (dangerous offender statute).”
State v. Piri, 204 N.W.2d 120 (Minn. 1973). “16 provides as follows: “A sentence to an extended term of imprisonment under section 609.155 shall not be imposed unless: (1) At the instance of the prosecuting attorney or by order of the court on its own motion, written notice is served by the prosecuting attorney on the…”
State v. Simmons, 258 N.W.2d 908 (Minn. 1977). “If the legislature had intended to apply the sequential requirements of § 609.155 to § 609.11, it could have used the clear and direct language of that section.”
United States v. James Howard Stewart, 531 F.2d 326 (6th Cir. 1976). “See Minn.Stat.Ann. § 609.155 (1964) (Comments, at 148-49).”
State v. Scott, 304 N.W.2d 296 (Minn. 1981). “The trial court also found that defendant was a dangerous offender under Minn.Stat. § 609.155 (1978), 2 but defendant’s sentences were not extended because the court concluded that defendant had only one prior felony conviction which could be considered under the dangerous…”
State Ex Rel. Holm v. Tahash, 139 N.W.2d 161 (Minn. 1965). “753, § 609.155). 3 372 U. S. 335 , 83 S. Ct. 792 , 9 L.”
State v. Mathiasen, 141 N.W.2d 805 (Minn. 1966). “753, § 609.155]), the new criminal code had not adequately provided against habitual bad-check writers who repeatedly wrote bad checks for less than $100.”
United States v. Tramunti, 377 F. Supp. 6 (S.D.N.Y. 1974). “The Minnesota legislature had already enacted a two-tiered sentencing structure, Minn.Stat. Ann. § 609.155 (1964), but New York had studied and rejected a similar bill, Proposed New York Penal Law, Study Bill, Senate Int.”
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.