Escobedo v. Oleisky

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Escobedo v. Oleisky

339 N.W.2d 263, 1983 Minn. LEXIS 1321

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedOctober 19, 1983

DocketC1-83-1284

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 339 N.W.2d 263 (Escobedo v. Oleisky) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Minnesota primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Escobedo v. Oleisky, 339 N.W.2d 263, 1983 Minn. LEXIS 1321 (Mich. 1983).

Pincite

Opinion

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus. Petitioner is a juvenile who was certified for prosecution as an adult on charges of criminal damage to property and trespass to a motor vehicle. Petitioner pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced by the trial court to consecutive jail terms of 90 days for each offense. The trial court refused to give petitioner credit for time spent in the juvenile detention center awaiting certification for prosecution as an adult. Minn.R.Crim.P. 27.03, subd. 4(b), provides credit for “all time spent in custody in connection with the offense or behavioral incident for which sentence is imposed * * *.” Petitioner has provided us with cases from two other jurisdictions holding that credit should be given in such a situation. State v. DaFonseca, 109 R.I. 414, 286 A.2d 592 (1972); People v. Thomas, 58 Mich.App. 9, 226 N.W.2d 734 (1975). The state has failed to provide us with an adequate reason why the Minnesota rule should not be interpreted similarly. We hold that the trial court erred in refusing to give petitioner credit for time spent in the detention center awaiting certification.

Remanded.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus. Petitioner is a juvenile who was certified for prosecution as an adult on charges of criminal damage to property and trespass to a motor vehicle. Petitioner pleaded guilty to the charges and was sentenced by the trial court to consecutive jail terms of 90 days for each offense. The trial court refused to give petitioner credit for time spent in the juvenile detention center awaiting certification for prosecution as an adult. Minn.R.Crim.P. 27.03, subd. 4(b), provides credit for “all time spent in custody in connection with the offense or behavioral incident for which sentence is imposed * * *.” Petitioner has provided us with cases from two other jurisdictions holding that credit should be given in such a situation. State v. DaFonseca, 109 R.I. 414, 286 A.2d 592 (1972); People v. Thomas, 58 Mich.App. 9, 226 N.W.2d 734 (1975). The state has failed to provide us with an adequate reason why the Minnesota rule should not be interpreted similarly. We hold that the trial court erred in refusing to give petitioner credit for time spent in the detention center awaiting certification.

Remanded.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

339 N.W.2d 263, 1983 Minn. LEXIS 1321, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/escobedo-v-oleisky-minn-1983.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack