Minnesota Supreme Court, 1982

State v. King

Minnesota Supreme Court · Decided July 16, 1982 · Amdahl

322 N.W.2d 184; 1982 Minn. LEXIS 1649 (North Western Reporter, Second Series)

Counsel

C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, and Brian I. Rademacher, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant., Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Alan L. Mitchell, County Atty., and Mark S. Rubin, Asst. County Atty., Duluth, 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 by Richard K. King from an order of the St. Louis County District Court denying his petition for postcon-viction 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 27, seeks resentencing in connection with 1978 convictions of burglary and theft, for which he received stayed concurrent 5-year prison terms. Those terms were executed in 1981 after petitioner was convicted of two more burglaries. Petitioner apparently was released from prison in May of this year. His 1981 sentences are due to expire in January of 1983, and his 1978 sentences are due to expire in March of 1984.

Petitioner’s criminal history score at the time of sentencing in 1978 would have been zero. The theft offense is a severity level III offense, and the burglary offense a severity level IV offense. The presumptive sentence for these offenses by one with a criminal history score of zero is 1 year and 1 day stayed. The effect of resentencing petitioner according to the Sentencing Guidelines would be to shorten by approximately 14 months the amount of time petitioner must spend on supervised release.

Given petitioner’s record of recidivism and his history of chemical dependency, we cannot conclude that the district court erred in refusing to resentence petitioner according to the Sentencing Guidelines. State v. Champion, 319 N.W.2d 21 (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.