Legal Opinion · Concurrence

Heilman v. Courtney

Supreme Court of Minnesota

Decided April 24, 2019No. A17-0863Published

1Concurrence

HUDSON, Justice (concurring).

I agree with the court's plain-language analysis and the conclusion that the conditional-release term imposed by Minn. Stat. § 169A.276, subd. 1(d) (2018), begins when a participant in the Challenge Incarceration Program begins living in the community. Based on this conclusion, I also agree that this case must be remanded to the court of appeals to address the remaining issues in this appeal.

I write separately, however, to explain my concern with section I of the court's opinion, which concludes that the court of appeals did not err when it sua sponte interpreted…

2Cases cited10 opinions

  1. Greenlaw v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2008
  2. Thiele v. StichSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1988
  3. State v. HannukselaSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1990
  4. State v. VangSupreme Court of Minnesota · 2014
  5. Johnson v. DirkswagerSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1982

5 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