Minnesota Supreme Court, 1982

Crawford v. State

Crawford v. State
Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided May 10, 1982 · Amdahl
319 N.W.2d 14; 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1549 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

Chestnut & Brooks and Kevin S. Burke, Minneapolis, for appellant., Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Thomas L. Johnson, County Atty., and Vernon E. Bergstrom, Asst. County Atty., Minneapolis, for respondent.

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)

Cites Minnesota statutes amended since this decision

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

Crawford v. State

Minnesota statutes cited

Sections of the Minnesota Statutes this opinion cites.

Opinion of the Court

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of the Hennepin County District Court denying a petition by Stephen Michael Crawford, age 34, for postconviction resentenc-ing in connection with his 1969 third-degree murder conviction. The petition was filed pursuant to the recent amendment to the Postconviction Remedy Act which provides that persons convicted of and sentenced for crimes committed before May 1, 1980, may petition the district court for postconviction relief in the form of resentencing pursuant to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines. Minn.Stat. § 590.01 (1980), amended by Act of June 1, 1981, ch. 366, § 1, 1981 Minn. Laws 2355, 2356. Our examination of the record satisfies us that the postconviction court was justifiably unable to find that petitioner’s early release from his sentence would not present a danger to the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. Accordingly, we conclude that the district court properly denied the petition. Smith v. State, 317 N.W.2d 366 (Minn. 1982); Stevenson v. Young, 314 N.W.2d 821 (Minn. 1982).

Petitioner remains subject to the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Corrections Board or its successor.

Affirmed.

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