Legal Opinion

State v. Sundstrom

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided August 27, 1991No. C1-91-729PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

FOLEY, Judge.

In this case of first impression, appellant Kari Scott Sundstrom contends the trial court erred by ordering that two concurrent sentences be served consecutively to a previously imposed federal sentence without giving reasons for departing from the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines. We reverse and remand.

FACTS

Sundstrom was charged in St. Louis County with three counts of theft by swindle. Under a plea agreement, Sundstrom pleaded guilty to theft by swindle involving a rental car and theft by swindle involving bank transactions. No agreement was made as to sentencing.

At…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  2. State v. DulskiSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
  3. State v. ThiemanSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1989
  4. State v. WakefieldSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1978
  5. State v. PetersenSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1975

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. State v. GellerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
  2. State v. HahnCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011
  3. State v. McAdoryCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1996
  4. State v. HahnCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2011

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

Powered by the Exa API