Legal Opinion
Meemken v. State
Court of Appeals of Minnesota
Decided June 3, 2003No. C2-02-1689PublishedCited by 8 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MINGE, Judge.
Appellant challenges the denial of post-conviction relief from an upward departure in his sentence on the ground that the facts supporting the upward departure were not submitted to the jury, thus violating his right to due process, as established by Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000). Because appellant is collaterally attacking his conviction, and because the Apprendi rule is not applied retroactively to collateral review, we affirm.
FACTS
Appellant James Joseph Meemken was charged with one count of attempted criminal sexual conduct…
2Cases cited19 opinions
- Apprendi v. New JerseySupreme Court of the United States · 2000
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Gideon v. WainwrightSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Teague v. LaneSupreme Court of the United States · 1989
- Griffith v. KentuckySupreme Court of the United States · 1987
14 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Hughes v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 2005
- State v. HoustonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
- State v. LotterNebraska Supreme Court · 2003
- State v. PetschlCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. ByronCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.