Mason v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• holding that the district court properly reserved the restitution issue when it had not received the affidavit of one of the victims or competent evidence of her loss at the time of sentencing
• stating that a district court’s failure to inform an offender of the 30-day period for challenging a claim for restitution did not excuse the offender’s failure to comply with the rule

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Meredyk
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2008-08-12· cited 14×
• In Re the Welfare of M.R.H.
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2006-06-13· cited 7×
• State v. Maddox
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2013-01-28· cited 7×
• State v. Henry
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2012-01-09· cited 3×

Cites

3 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Frost-Benco Electric Ass'n v. Minnesota Public Utilities Commission
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1984-11-30· cited 490×
• Dukes v. State
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2001-02-01· cited 110×
• In Re Condemnation by the City of Minneapolis of Certain Lands
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2001-08-16· cited 4×