Minnesota Supreme Court, 1982

Biskey v. State

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided June 28, 1982 · Amdahl

321 N.W.2d 31; 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1628 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, and Carolyn F. Tucker, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for petitioner, appellant., Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., Tom Foley, County Atty., and Steven C. DeCoster, Asst. County Atty., St. Paul, 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

Minn. Stat. § 590.01 — amended 1983

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. § 590.01

Opinion of the Court

AMDAHL, Chief Justice.

This is an appeal from a denial of a petition for postconviction relief in the form of resentencing according to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd. 3 (Supp. 1981). We affirm.

Petitioner, who is now 23, was charged in Ramsey County District Court in 1978 with two counts of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree, one count of criminal sexual conduct in the third degree, and kidnapping. Pursuant to a negotiated plea, petitioner pleaded guilty to one count of criminal sexual conduct in the second degree and was sentenced to a limited 10 years, rather than the statutory maximum of 15 years, in prison. Petitioner was scheduled to be released from prison on May 2, 1982, and his sentence expiration date is October 22,1985.

Petitioner’s criminal history score at the time of sentencing for the offense in question would have been zero. The offense in question is a severity level VII offense. The presumptive sentence for this offense for one with a criminal history score of zero is 24 months in prison. Petitioner presumably has been released from prison by now. If petitioner were resentenced to the presumptive term, he would be entitled to immediate release from sentence.

Given the nature of petitioner’s offense and the postconviction court’s opinion that petitioner should be subject to supervision after being released from prison, we con-*32elude that the postconviction court properly refused to find that petitioner’s early release from sentence would not present a danger to the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. State v. Champion, 319 N.W.2d 21 (Minn. 1982); State v. Rohrer, 317 N.W.2d 700 (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.