Toby Earl Johnson v. State of Minnesota
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GILDEA, Chief Justice.
Appellant Toby Earl Johnson appeals from the postconvietion court’s denial of his motion to correct his sentence. The postconvietion court concluded that Johnson’s motion was, in effect, a petition for postconvietion relief under Minn.Stat. § 590.01 (2014), and that it was both un timely and procedurally barred. Because the postconvietion court properly construed Johnson’s motion as a petition for postconvietion relief, and Johnson failed to file his petition within the 2-year limitations period, Minn.Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4(a), we affirm.
In 1999, Johnson…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- State v. KnafflaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1976
- State v. MaurstadSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2007
- Johnson v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2011
- State v. LewisSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2003
- State of Minnesota v. Dakari Michael ColesSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2015
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Rossberg v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2019
- Adrian Dominic Riley v. State of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2025
- Kim Thul Ouk v. State of MinnesotaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2016
- Mathew Paul Crow v. State of MinnesotaCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2026