Opinion
No. 82-78.
March 26, 1982. Rehearing Denied April 20, 1982.
Appeal from the District Court, Hennepin County, Jonathan Lebedoff, J.
C. Paul Jones, Public Defender, and Mark F. Anderson, Asst. Public Defender, Minneapolis, for appellant.
Warren Spannaus, Atty. Gen., St. Paul, Thomas L. Johnson, County Atty., Vernon E. Bergstrom, Asst. County Atty., Chief, Appellate Section, Thomas A. Weist and Rick Osborne, Asst. County Attys., and Beverly J. Wolfe, Staff Atty., Minneapolis, for respondent.
Considered and decided by the court en banc without oral argument.
Petitioner was originally charged with criminal sexual conduct in the first degree, Minn.Stat. § 609.342(b)(1980). Pursuant to a plea agreement he was permitted to plead guilty to criminal sexual conduct in the third degree, Minn.Stat. § 609.344(b)(1980). The trial court sentenced petitioner to 10 years in prison but stayed execution of sentence and placed petitioner on probation on condition that he serve 1 year in the workhouse and participate in a long-term sex offender treatment program upon completion of the workhouse term. Probation was revoked when petitioner refused to participate in the treatment program, and petitioner began serving his term at the state prison. Petitioner's estimated target release date is May 1982, and it appears that he will be required to participate in treatment as a condition of parole. Petitioner, seeking earlier release without the requirement that he participate in treatment, brought this petition for resentencing pursuant to the recent amendment to the Postconviction Remedy Act, which provides that persons convicted of and sentenced for crimes committed before May 1, 1980, may petition the district court for postconviction relief in the form of resentencing pursuant to the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines. Minn.Stat. § 590.01 (1980), as amended by Act of June 1, 1981, c. 366, § 1 1981 Minn. Laws 2355. The postconviction court denied relief on the ground that it was unable to conclude, as required by the amendment as a prerequisite to early release, that petitioner's early release would not present a danger to the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. Id. at 2356. We affirm because our examination of the record satisfies us that petitioner failed to meet his burden of proving that his early release would not endanger the public and would not be incompatible with the welfare of society. See Stevenson v. Young, 314 N.W.2d 821 (Minn. 1982).
Petitioner remains subject to the jurisdiction of the Minnesota Corrections Board or its successor.
Affirmed.