Ani v. State
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 2017, among the opinions in this site’s citation index. Amendment history from the Minnesota Revisor of Statutes. A later amendment does not necessarily affect this decision's analysis — check the current statute text.Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision
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.
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- State v. Kirby (Minn. 2017)
- State v. Marburger (Minn. 1980)
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
This is an appeal from the denial of postconvietion relief. Petitioner was convicted by a district court jury of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree, Minn. Stat. § 609.342 (Supp. 1975), and aggravated sodomy, Minn.Stat. § 609.293, subd. 2 (1974), and was sentenced by the trial court to a 3-30-year prison term. In State v. Ani, 257 N.W.2d 699 (Minn. 1977), we affirmed this judgment of conviction against a number of claims, including that the evidence of his guilt was legally insufficient. This postcon-viction proceeding followed, petitioner claiming that his trial counsel did not represent him adequately. The district court denied relief and petitioner appealed, raising on appeal a new issue relating to the length of his sentence based on our recent opinion in State v. Coolidge, 282 N.W.2d 511 (Minn. 1979) (reducing the maximum term for a sodomy conviction from 30 to 20 years because the sodomy statute was impliedly repealed before final judgment had occurred and replaced by a statute permitting only a 20-year maximum term). The state agrees that petitioner’s maximum term should be reduced to 20 years but disputes petitioner’s contention that he should receive a new trial because of incompetence of counsel or in the interests of justice. We hold that the postconvietion court, after applying the appropriate standard — see White v. State, 309 Minn. 476, 479, 248 N.W.2d 281, 285 (1976) — properly ruled that petitioner failed to meet his burden of proving ineffective assistance. Petitioner’s maximum prison term is reduced from 30 to 20 years in accordance with the view expressed in our opinion in State v. Coolidge, supra.
Denial of new trial affirmed; sentence reduced.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.