State v. Huether

SANDSTROM, Justice.

[¶ 1] Ray Huether appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of gross sexual imposition. We hold the district court’s denial of Huether’s motion to suppress is supported by sufficient competent evidence and is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. We also conclude the court did not rely upon an impermissible factor in sentencing Huether. We affirm.

I

[¶ 2] The State charged Huether with possession of child pornography and with gross sexual imposition for allegedly engaging in sexual acts with a child less than six years of age…