Court Opinion

ID: 9730298
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 15:07:25.545714+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:26:05.220654
License: Public Domain

WOZNIAK, Judge,
dissenting.
I respectfully dissent. Under the Sentencing Guidelines, “substantial and compelling circumstances” must be present if the trial court is to depart dispositionally from the presumptive sentence and place defendant on probation.
The nonexclusive list of mitigating factors are all inapplicable to the facts of this case. Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines § II.D.103(2)(a).
Further, our Supreme Court has stated: A trial court sentencing a defendant for criminal sexual conduct may depart dis-positionally from the presumptive sentence and place the defendant on probation only if the defendant is particularly amenable to probation or if offense-related mitigating circumstances are present.
State v. Love, 350 N.W.2d 359, 361 (Minn. 1984) (emphasis added.)
Neither condition is present in this record. Defendant has not demonstrated by his actions that he is. particularly amenable to probation.
The record further discloses no mitigating circumstances. The opposite conclusion is warranted. I would reverse and remand for sentencing pursuant to the Sentencing Guidelines.