Minnesota Statutes
Minn. Stat. § 610.29 (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[Repealed]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[Repealed, 1963 c 753 art 2 s 17]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 17
cases, 1954–1968 · leading case: State v. Pederson, 88 N.W.2d 13 (Minn. 1958).
State v. Pederson, 88 N.W.2d 13 (Minn. 1958). “the second degree, for which offense you have been duly informed against by the county attorney of Wilkin County, Minnesota, and of which you have been found guilty on trial by a jury, and of which you are adjudged guilty, this offense being subsequent to four or more other…”
State Ex Rel. Dinneen v. Tahash, 136 N.W.2d 847 (Minn. 1965). “Accordingly, under the provisions of § 610.29, the plea of guilty to each charge exposed defendant to a minimum of 10 years and a maximum of life imprisonment.”
State Ex Rel. La Rose v. Tahash, 115 N.W.2d 687 (Minn. 1962). “” From the foregoing, it is obvious that this decision falls far short of holding, as relator contends here, that the enactments of various legislatures, organized under apportionment statutes asserted to be invalid because of population changes, are null and void, and that…”
State Ex Rel. Flynn v. Rigg, 98 N.W.2d 79 (Minn. 1959). “28, which deals with punishment for a felony where there are one or two prior convictions, and § 610.29, which deals with punishment upon conviction of a felony and three prior convictions, are specific on this point.”
State v. Richter, 133 N.W.2d 537 (Minn. 1965). “1961, § 610.29, (since superseded by Minn.St. 609.”
State Ex Rel. Hansen v. Rigg, 104 N.W.2d 553 (Minn. 1960). “75 increases punishment for the habitual offender who has been twice convicted within a previous 5-year period for the commission of a “misdemeanor or gross misdemeanor involving moral turpitude,” as opposed to § 610.29, which increases the penalty upon conviction of one who has…”
State Ex Rel. Richter v. Swenson, 63 N.W.2d 265 (Minn. 1954). “Thereupon the court imposed sentence under § 610.29 to twice the minimum sentence provided for the crime of which he was convicted but for a term not to exceed 25 years.”
State Ex Rel. Peterson v. Tahash, 109 N.W.2d 328 (Minn. 1961). “It is apparently the conten *196 tion of the petitioner that the sentence invokes the penalties of the habitual-criminal statute, § 610.29, and that it cannot be effective because one of the prior convictions, that imposed in 1951 for car theft when he was 17 years of age, was…”
State Ex Rel. Gerberding v. Tahash, 146 N.W.2d 541 (Minn. 1966). “28, which provided for an increased sentence for a second offense, rather than under § 610.29, which prescribed the punishment for three or more felony convictions.”
State v. Jones, 124 N.W.2d 727 (Minn. 1963). “The remaining assignments of error relate to the sentence imposed by the court pursuant to § 610.29, which was then in force and governed imposition of an increased sentence for habitual offenders.”
State v. Richter, 133 N.W.2d 537 (Minn. 1965). “1961, § 610.29, (since superseded by Minn. St. 609.”
State Ex Rel. Hines v. Tahash, 116 N.W.2d 399 (Minn. 1962). “Clearly the question of whether or not the punishment on the substantive charge should be increased under the procedural provisions of our statutes may be determined in a subsequent proceeding.”
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.