State v. Holmes
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
MEYER, Justice.
In this appeal, we are asked to construe the meaning of Minn.Stat. § 169A.28, subd. 1 (2004), which provides for mandatory consecutive sentencing for a felony driving while impaired (DWI) conviction where a defendant’s sentence on a prior gross misdemeanor DWI offense is executed at the time of sentencing for the felony DWI. Respondent Frank E. Holmes was on probation for a prior gross misdemean- or DWI offense when he was convicted of felony DWI. The district court imposed consecutive sentences, did not downwardly amend Holmes’ criminal history score, and sentenced…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- State v. ZeimetSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2005
- State v. KlangSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982
- State v. KierCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2004
- State v. HolmesCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2005
3Cited by2 opinions
- State v. FranksCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007
- State v. ColemanCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 2007