Case ID: nw2d_369/html/0329-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "POPOVICH, Chief Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William Wallace MERRITT, Petitioner, Appellant, v. STATE of Minnesota, Respondent.
    No. C7-85-421.
    Court of Appeals of Minnesota.
    June 18, 1985.
    Review Denied Aug. 20, 1985.
    William Wallace Merritt, pro se.
    Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., Tom Foley, Ramsey County Atty., Steven C. DeCoster, Asst. County Atty., St. Paul, for respondent.
    Considered and decided by POPOVICH, C.J., and ' NIERENGARTEN and RANDALL, JJ., with oral argument waived.
   SUMMARY OPINION

POPOVICH, Chief Judge.

FACTS

Appellant William Wallace Merritt was convicted of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree in Hennepin County and was sentenced to a term of 43 months. Subsequently he was convicted of criminal sexual conduct in the first degree in Ramsey County and was given a 43 month sentence consecutive to the Hennepin County sentence. Appellant petitioned for post-conviction relief claiming there was no written reason filed to justify the consecutive sentence. The post-conviction court denied appellant’s requested relief stating that under Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.F. the court may use consecutive sentencing where defendant is convicted of different felonies for crimes against different persons. Appellant appeals from the denial of his petition for post-conviction relief.

DECISION

Consecutive sentencing was authorized by the guidelines and its use did not constitute a departure requiring a departure report. Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines II.F.

Affirmed.