Housing & Redevelopment Authority of the City of St. Paul v. Naegele Outdoor Advertising Co. of the Twin Cities

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• following Ross, 295 Kan. 1126, and finding district court did not abuse its discretion by imposing consecutive sentences
• affirming on direct appeal the district court's imposition of consecutive sentences in this case
• upholding court's sentence even though defendant expressed remorse and accepted responsibility
• defendant bore burden of proving abuse of discretion in district court's order that sentences would run consecutively, rather than concurrently
• defendant bore burden of proving abuse of discretion in district court's order that sentences would run consecutively, rather than concurrently
• defendant bore burden of proving abuse of discretion in district court's order that sentences would run consecutively, rather than concurrently

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).