State v. Wakefield

How courts have described this case

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

• holding a state sentence is presumed to run concurrent “when there has been no specific determination by the trial court.”
• providing that “precise terms of the sentence” include whether multiple sentences are to run concurrently or consecutively
• considering the admissibility of polygraph results

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

10 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. MacK
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1980-05-16· cited 207×
• State v. Gassler
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1993-09-03· cited 94×
• State v. Willis
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1997-02-13· cited 30×
• State v. Hahn
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2011-05-31· cited 15×
• State v. Sundstrom
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1991-08-27· cited 4×
• State v. Jennings
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1989-11-28· cited 4×
• State v. Roy
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 2019-05-22· cited 4×
• State v. Rasinski
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1995-02-14· cited 3×
• State v. Schaeffer
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 1990-05-11· cited 2×
• State v. Gilbert
  Court of Appeals of Minnesota· 2001-10-02· cited 2×

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• State v. Hill
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1977-04-08· cited 35×
• State v. Petersen
  Supreme Court of Minnesota· 1975-10-10· cited 10×