Johnson v. State

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Johnson v. State

324 N.W.2d 368, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1781

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedSeptember 24, 1982

DocketNo. 82-579

StatusPublished

This text of 324 N.W.2d 368 (Johnson v. State) 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

Johnson v. State, 324 N.W.2d 368, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1781 (Mich. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal by Olin Joseph Johnson, age 27, from an order of the Ramsey County District Court denying his petition for postconviction relief in the form of resen-tencing according to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 590.01, subd. 3 (Supp.1981). We affirm.

On December 1, 1979, petitioner participated in a liquor store robbery in which an accomplice, Richard Plan, shot and killed the store’s clerk. See State v. Plan, 316 N.W.2d 727 (Minn.1982). Charged with a number of offenses, including felony murder, petitioner was permitted to plead guilty to aggravated robbery. The district court sentenced petitioner to a 20-year prison term. The current expiration date is February of 1993. Petitioner’s target release date is March of 1984.

Petitioner seeks resentencing to a term of 24 months in prison, which is the presumptive Guidelines sentence for aggravated robbery (severity level VII offense) by a person with petitioner’s criminal history score (zero).

In State v. Champion, 319 N.W.2d 21, 23 (Minn.1982), we stated that “we generally will not interfere with the postconviction court’s refusal to make the finding that is prerequisite to resentencing, at least in cases in which the petitioner is serving a sentence for a violent offense or has a record suggesting that he is likely to engage in criminal conduct after his release.” In this case petitioner is serving a sentence for a violent offense which resulted in the death of another person. Petitioner had the burden of overcoming this fact and proving that his early release from sentence would not present a danger to the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. The district court properly concluded that petitioner failed to meet this burden.

Petitioner remains subject to the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Corrections.

Affirmed.

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

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal by Olin Joseph Johnson, age 27, from an order of the Ramsey County District Court denying his petition for postconviction relief in the form of resen-tencing according to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 590.01, subd. 3 (Supp.1981). We affirm.

On December 1, 1979, petitioner participated in a liquor store robbery in which an accomplice, Richard Plan, shot and killed the store’s clerk. See State v. Plan, 316 N.W.2d 727 (Minn.1982). Charged with a number of offenses, including felony murder, petitioner was permitted to plead guilty to aggravated robbery. The district court sentenced petitioner to a 20-year prison term. The current expiration date is February of 1993. Petitioner’s target release date is March of 1984.

Petitioner seeks resentencing to a term of 24 months in prison, which is the presumptive Guidelines sentence for aggravated robbery (severity level VII offense) by a person with petitioner’s criminal history score (zero).

In State v. Champion, 319 N.W.2d 21, 23 (Minn.1982), we stated that “we generally will not interfere with the postconviction court’s refusal to make the finding that is prerequisite to resentencing, at least in cases in which the petitioner is serving a sentence for a violent offense or has a record suggesting that he is likely to engage in criminal conduct after his release.” In this case petitioner is serving a sentence for a violent offense which resulted in the death of another person. Petitioner had the burden of overcoming this fact and proving that his early release from sentence would not present a danger to the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. The district court properly concluded that petitioner failed to meet this burden.

Petitioner remains subject to the jurisdiction of the Commissioner of Corrections.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

324 N.W.2d 368, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1781, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-state-minn-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack