Letter from Inmate to Trial Court Judge is Neither Petition nor Motion Conferring Jurisdiction on Court

Minnesota v. Henry, Minn.Ct.App., 1/9/12.  The trial court sentenced Mr. Henry to 288 months in prison for fleeing a peace officer in a motor vehicle resulting in death.  If that weren’t enough, the court also imposed a $77.00 surcharge and reserved restitution.  Sometime thereafter, the trial court ordered restitution of just under a thousand bucks.

Mr. Henry commenced filing various pro se pleadings back with the district court, all of which got denied.  Perhaps in frustration Mr. Henry sent a letter to the judge inquiring of the court about the $77.00 surcharge.  The trial court wrote back, informing Mr. Henry, perhaps for the first time, of the amount of restitution that he owed. It does not appear that the prosecutor got any of this correspondence.

Mr. Henry filed a notice of appeal from the court’s letter in to him.  The court of appeals said now, just wait a minute.  This correspondence is neither a post conviction petition nor a motion for something or other.  A post conviction petition must at least include a statement of facts and grounds for relief.  A motion must at least state grounds for the requested relief, be supported by affidavit and served on other parties.  And, if somehow Mr. Henry got around all that, the judge’s letter back to him didn’t grant any relief whatsoever so it’s not a final order from which an appeal could be taken.

Oh, that restitution?  Rule 33.03 does not excuse lack of notice of entry of the restitution order does not affect the time to appeal.