Legal Opinion

Bee Yang v. State

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided November 28, 2011No. A11-400PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

CONNOLLY, Judge.

Appellant’s postconviction petition for relief was denied by the postconviction court on the ground that it was time-barred under Minn.Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4(c). He challenges that decision, contending that claims invoking the subdivision 4(b)(5) exception should not be subject to a two-year time limitation. We affirm.

FACTS

In 2005, pursuant to a plea agreement, appellant Bee Yang, pleaded guilty to one count of second-degree criminal sexual conduct in violation of Minn.Stat. § 609.343, subd. 1(b) (2004). On January 24, 2006, appellant was sentenced and received a stay…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Leake v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
  2. State v. AustinSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1980
  3. Deegan v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2006
  4. Brua v. MINNESOTA JOINT UNDERWRITING ASS'NSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2010
  5. Hamilton v. Commissioner of Public SafetySupreme Court of Minnesota · 1999

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

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Dion Dalvante Harris v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014

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

Powered by the Exa API