Knight v. State

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Knight v. State

327 N.W.2d 83, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1885

CourtSupreme Court of Minnesota

DecidedDecember 17, 1982

DocketNo. 82-1075

StatusPublished

This text of 327 N.W.2d 83 (Knight 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

Knight v. State, 327 N.W.2d 83, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1885 (Mich. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal by Danue Ervin Knight, age 41, from an order of the Ramsey County District Court denying his petition for postconviction relief in the form of resen-[84]*84tencing according to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 590.01, subd. 3 (Supp.1981). We affirm.

Petitioner was convicted in 1979 of burglary and criminal sexual conduct in the first degree and was sentenced to two concurrent 20-year prison terms. His convictions were affirmed in State v. Knight, 295 N.W.2d 592 (Minn.1980). Although the sufficiency of the evidence of petitioner’s guilt was not an issue on appeal, we stated in our opinion that the evidence of guilt was “overwhelming, consisting of positive identification testimony by the victim and strong evidence corroborating her testimony.” 295 N.W.2d at 593.

Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree, which is the more serious of the two offenses, is a severity level VIII offense. If the Sentencing Guidelines had been in effect at the time that petitioner committed the offenses in 1978, petitioner’s criminal history score at the time of sentencing in 1979 would have been one. The presumptive term for a severity level VIII offense by a person with a criminal history score of one is 54 (50-58) months in prison. If petitioner were resentenced to the presumptive term he would be entitled to immediate release from prison.

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.” Petitioner is a violent offender with a record of recidivism (in 1967 petitioner was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree and in 1975 he was convicted of a drug offense). Petitioner had the. burden of overcoming the negative factors and proving that his early release from sentence would not endanger the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. The district court concluded that petitioner failed to meet this burden, and we agree.

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 Danue Ervin Knight, age 41, from an order of the Ramsey County District Court denying his petition for postconviction relief in the form of resen-[84]*84tencing according to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 590.01, subd. 3 (Supp.1981). We affirm.

Petitioner was convicted in 1979 of burglary and criminal sexual conduct in the first degree and was sentenced to two concurrent 20-year prison terms. His convictions were affirmed in State v. Knight, 295 N.W.2d 592 (Minn.1980). Although the sufficiency of the evidence of petitioner’s guilt was not an issue on appeal, we stated in our opinion that the evidence of guilt was “overwhelming, consisting of positive identification testimony by the victim and strong evidence corroborating her testimony.” 295 N.W.2d at 593.

Criminal sexual conduct in the first degree, which is the more serious of the two offenses, is a severity level VIII offense. If the Sentencing Guidelines had been in effect at the time that petitioner committed the offenses in 1978, petitioner’s criminal history score at the time of sentencing in 1979 would have been one. The presumptive term for a severity level VIII offense by a person with a criminal history score of one is 54 (50-58) months in prison. If petitioner were resentenced to the presumptive term he would be entitled to immediate release from prison.

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.” Petitioner is a violent offender with a record of recidivism (in 1967 petitioner was convicted of manslaughter in the second degree and in 1975 he was convicted of a drug offense). Petitioner had the. burden of overcoming the negative factors and proving that his early release from sentence would not endanger the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. The district court concluded that petitioner failed to meet this burden, and we agree.

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

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

327 N.W.2d 83, 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1885, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/knight-v-state-minn-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack