Wayne v. State of Minnesota, Minn.S.Ct., 10/14/2015. Over the years, Mr. Wayne has filed post convictions petitions nearly too innumerable to count. This is number eight. Mr. Wayne styled this one, "Motion for Correction of Sentence," hoping to sneak it in under Rule 27.03, subd. 9, which currently does not have a limitations term nailed to it. Mr. Wayne, however, was too clever by half for both the trial court and for Justice Stras.
What Mr. Wayne was complaining about only tangentially had anything to do with his sentence. He's serving a life sentence for the stabbing death of Mona Armendariz, back in 1987. He said that the trial court had erred by failing to instruct the jury on a lesser-included offense and that this error eventually led to a sentence longer than was "authorized by law." Well, both the trial court and Justice Stras called Mr. Wayne out on this. Both said that what he was really complaining about was the manner in which the jury convicted him and not the manner in which the trial judge then sentenced him. That made his pleading the equivalent of a post conviction petition, and that petition is barred by the two year limitations period unless Mr. Wayne can show an exception to it.
Because Mr. Wayne was hoping to fly underneath the post conviction statute's limitations radar his pleadings here never even mentioned either that statute or any of its exceptions. Having failed to do so, there was no abuse of discretion by the trial court in summarily denying the request for relief.
No comments:
Post a Comment