Case Name: STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. James Allen BOOTH, Appellant
Court: Minnesota Court of Appeals
Jurisdiction: Minnesota
Decision Date: 1984-11-13
Citations: 357 N.W.2d 406
Docket Number: No. C4-84-1290
Parties: STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. James Allen BOOTH, Appellant.
Judges: Considered and decided by POPOVICH, C.J., and HUSPENI and FORSBERG, JJ., with oral argument waived.
Reporter: North Western Reporter 2d
Volume: 357
Pages: 406–407

Head Matter:
STATE of Minnesota, Respondent, v. James Allen BOOTH, Appellant.
No. C4-84-1290.
Court of Appeals of Minnesota.
Nov. 13, 1984.
Hubert H. Humphrey, III, Atty. Gen., Thomas Foley, Ramsey County Atty., Steven C. DeCoster, Asst. Ramsey County Atty., St. Paul, for respondent.
C. Paul Jones, State Public Defender, Heidi H. Crissey, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant.
Considered and decided by POPOVICH, C.J., and HUSPENI and FORSBERG, JJ., with oral argument waived.

Opinion:
SUMMARY OPINION
FORSBERG, Judge.
FACTS
Appellant was charged with burglary and theft for his participation in stealing various items from an auto parts store in St. Paul. Under a plea agreement, appellant pleaded guilty to attempted theft and the State dismissed burglary and theft charges. Appellant was sentenced to 18 months in prison, a six-month upward dura-tional departure, and ordered to pay $50 restitution.
DECISION
The trial court considered how the offense occurred and appellant's role in it, i.e. the entire course of conduct underlying the charge. Kilcoyne v. State, 344 N.W.2d 394 (Minn.1984); State v. Broten, 343 N.W.2d 38 (Minn.1984). The trial court was justified in concluding that appellant's actions were significantly more serious than the typical attempted theft. State v. Cox, 343 N.W.2d 641 (Minn.1984).
The restitution order must be vacated in light of State v. Wentz, 343 N.W.2d 667 (Minn.1984); State v. Raddatz, 345 N.W.2d 798 (Minn.Ct.App.1984).
Affirmed in part, vacated in part.