Willie Edd Reynolds v. State of Minnesota
Supreme Court of Minnesota
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
GILDEA, Chief Justice.
The question presented in this case is whether an offender who contends that his sentence violates Blakely v. Washington, 542 U.S. 296, 124 S.Ct. 2531, 159 L.Ed.2d 403 (2004), must bring that challenge before the expiration of the 2-year limitations period in the postconviction statute, Minn. Stat. § 590.01, subd. 4 (2014). Respondent Willie Edd Reynolds challenged the imposition of a 10-year conditional-release term as part of his sentence under Minn. R. Crim. P. 27.03, subd. 9. Reynolds claimed that the conditional-release term was not authorized by law because…
2Cases cited23 opinions
- Blakely v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 2004
- State v. MisquadaceSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2002
- United States v. BradfordCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1952
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- State v. OlsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1992
18 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by14 opinions
- Red River Commodities, Inc. v. EidsnessNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
- State v. KirbySupreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
- United States v. Brian BarthmanCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 2019
- State v. MegerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2017
- Munt v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2018
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.