Legal Opinion
Roth v. Commissioner of Corrections
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided December 23, 2008No. A08-0269PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
WORKE, Judge.
Appellant argues that the district court erred in denying his petition for a writ of habeas corpus because (1) he was disciplined for refusing to admit to sex offenses and (2) Johnson v. Fabian, 735 N.W.2d 295 (Minn.2007) applies retroactively to his case. We affirm.
FACTS
In 2001, appellant Jim Adam Roth was charged, among other things, with first-degree criminal sexual conduct, second-degree criminal sexual conduct, and kidnapping. On July 20, 2001, appellant pleaded guilty to kidnapping, and the remaining charges were dismissed. Appellant was sentenced to 158 months in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- In Re the Excess Surplus Status of Blue Cross & Blue Shield of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Lolling v. Midwest PatrolSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1996
- Johnson v. FabianSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- Northwest v. LaFleurCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1998
- State Ex Rel. Guth v. FabianCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2006
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MelvinSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
- State v. BookerCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2009