Minnesota Court of Appeals, 1987

State v. Hendrickson

Minnesota Court of Appeals · Decided June 9, 1987 · Popovich, Stone, Mulally

406 N.W.2d 631; 1987 Minn. App. LEXIS 4456 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Michael A. Fahey, Carver Co. Atty., Harvey Ginsberg, Asst. Co. Atty., Carver County Courthouse, Chaska, for respondent., C. Paul Jones, State Public Defender, Susan K. Maki, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant.

Can I rely on this case?

Citation treatment has not been reviewed for this case. The notes below come from the citation graph and the Minnesota Revisor's amendment records, not from a review of how later courts treated this decision.

(as of 9/30/2026)

Last cited by a Minnesota appellate court in 1999, among the opinions in this site’s citation index.

Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision

Minn. Stat. § 609.342 — amended 1989

Amendment history from the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. A later amendment does not necessarily affect this decision's analysis — check the current statute text.

Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

See our Terms of Use before relying on these notes. Report an error

Minnesota statutes cited

Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.

Minn. Stat. § 609.342

Cases that cite this one

2 later published cases cite this decision.

State v. Jackson (Minn. Ct. App. 1999)
State v. Allen (Minn. Ct. App. 1992)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

MEMORANDUM OPINION

EDWARD MULALLY, Judge.

On December 5, 1986, appellant Stanley Hendrickson pleaded guilty to two counts of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree, Minn.Stat. § 609.342, subd. 1 (1986), for the sexual abuse of two young boys in separate incidents. One of the boys was 9 years old, the other was 11. The trial court sentenced appellant to two consecutive sentences of 60 and 41 months imprisonment. At the same time the trial court revoked a stay of imposition which had been granted in regard to appellant’s prior conviction in 1981 for criminal sexual conduct in the second degree and imposed a concurrent 21-month sentence for that offense. In this appeal appellant challenges the consecutive nature of his sentences.

DECISION

Appellant acknowledges that consecutive sentencing did not constitute a departure under the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.F. The decision to impose consecutive sentencing was a discretionary determination by the court. State v. Freyer, 328 N.W.2d 140, 142 (Minn. 1982); Massey v. State, 352 N.W.2d 487, 489 (Minn.Ct.App. 1984), pet. for rev. denied (Minn. Oct. 16, 1984). Appellant asserts the sentence unfairly exaggerates the criminality of his conduct. We disagree. The sentence was not an abuse of discretion.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.