State v. Sanders
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
R.A. RANDALL, Judge.
Appellant challenges the posteonvietion court’s denial of his request to correct his sentence from 180 months to 65 months. Appellant correctly argues that the original sentence was erroneously based on the career offender statute because he did not have the requisite sequential prior convictions to qualify as a career offender. Appellant argues that the court then violated his due process rights by resentencing him under the dangerous offender statute without a hearing to allow him to contest the state’s claim that he was a dangerous offender. Appellant argues that…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Williams v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1985
- Dukes v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- State v. CalmesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2001
- Hale v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1997
- State v. HustonCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2000