Legal Opinion

State v. Ramstad

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 29, 1984No. C1-83-1592PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FOLEY, Judge.

The appellant was convicted by a jury of a misdemeanor DWI, was sentenced, and appeals from the sentence. There is no transcript of the evidence. The appellant was indigent at time of trial.

Appellant contends he should have been sentenced in accordance with certain policy guidelines on first offenses in the Tenth Judicial District. Appellant is in error. The statute, rather than any policy guideline, fixes the maximum punishment. The appellant’s sentence was within the statutory limits.

Our review of the sentence reflects that appellant, together with other conditions, was…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Fuller v. OregonSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
  2. State v. KottenbrochNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. State v. Lopez-SolisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999
  2. State v. AndersonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1985
  3. State v. MartinsonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1990
  4. State v. NiemczykCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987
  5. State v. FeehanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1987

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API