“Full Term of Imprisonment” Means Two-Thirds of a Defendant’s Executed Sentence.

State v. Leathers, Minn.S.Ct., 7/20/2011.  Mr. Leathers apparently got into it with five different police officers, resulting in charges of and convictions for five counts of first degree assault.  The trial court imposed concurrent sentences of 189 months, but told Mr. Leathers that he would be eligible for supervised release after serving two thirds of that sentence.  The state appealed, arguing that Mr. Leathers was not eligible for supervised release and had to serve every day of the 189 months.

One who is convicted of assaulting a police officer is subject to a minimum sentence.  Minn.Stat. 609.221, subd. 2(b).  That person must be sentenced to at least ten years.  In addition:

A defendant convicted and sentenced as required by this paragraph is not eligible for probation, parole, discharge, work release, or supervised release, until that person has served the full term of imprisonment as provided by law, notwithstanding the provisions of sections 241.26, 242.19, 243.05, 244.04, 609.12, and 609.135. Notwithstanding section 609.135, the court may not stay the imposition or execution of this sentence.

The state, and the court of appeals, concluded that this provision required Mr. Leathers to serve the entire sentence, with no eligibility for supervised release.  The Supreme Court disagrees with this conclusion and says, yes he is eligible for supervised release.

Mr. Leathers argued that the term, “full term of imprisonment” is two-thirds of an executed sentence, citing Minn.Stat. 244.01, subd. 8.  The state said that the assault statute means what it says:  full is full and not two-thirds.  The court of appeals said that the 244.01 subd. 8 definition only applied to chapter 244 (which is what the statute actually says), and that the assault statute means what it says:  full is full and not two-thirds.

The Supreme Court sides with Mr. Leathers.