State v. Hutchins, Jr., Minn.Ct.App., 10/20/2014. A jury convicted Mr. Hutchins, Jr. of third degree criminal sexual conduct and first degree burglary, a “single behavioral incident.” The court imposed a sentence of 130 months on the criminal sexual conduct conviction, and a concurrent sentence of 105 months on the burglary. The sentence of 130 months was an upward durational departure.
Mr. Hutchins, Jr. successfully appealed this sentence. The appellate court said that the grounds for the upward durational departure on the CSC conviction were invalid. The court told the trial court to do one of three things: impose the presumptive sentence, impose permissive consecutive sentences, or empanel a resentencing jury.
On remand, the trial court left the 105 month sentence on the burglary intact but imposed a permissive consecutive sentence of 41 months on the CSC. Total sentence: 146 months. Mr. Hutchins, Jr. successfully appealed again. This time, the appellate court told the trial court to impose either the presumptive sentence or a permissive consecutive sentence, but with the total sentence not to exceed 130 months.
On the third try, the trial court retained the 41 months sentence on the CSC and reduced the burglary sentence from 105 months to 89 months. Total sentence: 130 months.
Mr. Hutchins, Jr. appealed again. He said that the burglary sentence was immune from adjustment on remand because he had only appealed the sentence on the CSC conviction. The appellate court points to the statutory authority of courts to review sentences, Minn.Stat. 244.11, subd. (b):
On an appeal . . . the court may review the sentence imposed or stayed to determine whether the sentence is inconsistent with statutory requirements, unreasonable, inappropriate, excessive, unjustifiably disparate, or not warranted by the findings of fact issued by the district court. This review shall be in addition to all other powers of review presently existing. The court may dismiss or affirm the appeal, vacate or set aside the sentence imposed or stayed and direct entry of an appropriate sentence or order further proceedings to be had as the court may direct
So, just what is the “sentence” here. The appellate court takes an expansive view of what the “sentence” was. It goes with something called the “sentencing package” concept so that the sentence as a whole is up for grabs, at least under this statute. So long as the trial court did what it was told: impose either the presumptive sentence or a permissive consecutive sentence that does not exceed the original sentence of 130 months.
No comments:
Post a Comment