Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State of Minnesota v. Theodore Pierre Jerry

Court of Appeals of Minnesota

Decided May 26, 2015No. A14-1086Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSchellhas, Judge

(concurring in part, dissenting in.part).

I concur with the majority’s syllabus point that, when imposing consecutive sentences, the district court must sentence the offenses in the order in which they occurred. I respectfully disagree that the district court erred by sentencing appellant for criminal sexual conduct first and first-degree burglary second.

“An offense is defined by its elements.” State v. Patterson, 796 N.W.2d 516, 532 (Minn.App.2011), affd, 812 N.W.2d 106 (Minn.2012). The state charged appellant with first-degree burglary under Minn. Stat. § 609.582, subd. 1(c) (2012). The…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State of Minnesota v. Jose Arriage Soto, Jr.Supreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
  2. State v. AndersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1984
  3. State v. TotimehCourt of Appeals of Minnesota · 1988
  4. State v. PattersonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2012
  5. State of Minnesota v. Claude Riley Crockson, Jr.Court of Appeals of Minnesota · 2014

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API