Legal Opinion
State v. Maurstad
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 13, 2005No. A04-1000PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
KALITOWSKI, Judge.
Appellant challenges his sentence and an order denying postconviction relief from his sentence, arguing that (1) he did not waive his sentencing challenge by failing to raise it at trial; (2) his criminal history score should not have included a custody status point; and (3) he was entitled to a jury determination of his criminal history score.
FACTS
On February 6, 1996, appellant Daniel Leslie Maurstad pleaded guilty to aiding burglary in the second degree. At appellant’s sentencing, the court stayed imposition of that sentence and placed him on supervised probation…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- State v. KnafflaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- State v. GrillerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1998
- Dukes v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- State v. MaurstadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- State v. MaleyCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
- State v. BluemelCourt of Appeals of Utah · 2023
- State v. MaurstadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007