Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

330 N.W.2d 110

State v. Vazquez

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided February 18, 1983

Supreme Court of Minnesota · decided 1983-02-18

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1983-02-18

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2010 · most notably State v. Back (1983), State v. Norris (1988)

26 state decisions

1601983199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

WAHL, Justice

¶1(concurring in part, dissenting in part).

¶2I agree that the evidence of defendant’s guilt is legally sufficient to affirm his conviction. I must respectfully dissent, however, from the decision of the majority to refuse to modify a sentence which is unfairly disparate under the circumstances of this case.

¶3The facts testified to by the victim indicate that the conduct of the co-defendant was far more egregious than that of defendant and consisted of repeated acts of criminal sexual conduct committed over a lengthy period of time and at several locations. I cannot give lip service to the sentencing guidelines provision that “[t]he exercise of constitutional rights by the defendant during the adjudication process” should not be used as a reason for departure and at the same time approve a sentence nearly twice that of a co-defendant of equal or greater culpability whose only distinguishing characteristic was that he pleaded guilty rather than going to trial.

¶4I would reduce the sentence to the 45-month presumptive sentence received by the co-defendant.

SIMONETT, J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
/330/nw2d/110 · .json · Public domain