 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Suggs2/11/2003
In pleading guilty to first-degree criminal sexual conduct, appellant Allen Suggs, Jr. agreed with the state that the district court could impose an executed sentence with the presumptive sentence of 98 months as the minimum term and 144 months as the maximum term. The parties also agreed that the district court could base its sentence on the police reports, the victim's statement, and the laboratory tests. After finding that Suggs had invaded the victim's zone of privacy and had committed his crime in the presence of the victim's children, the district court sentenced him to 130 months. Suggs argues on appeal that the district court abused its discretion in departing from the sentencing guidelines. Because the district court did not abuse its discretion, we affirm.
FACTS
On May 18, 2000, A.B. was asleep in her apartment bedroom with her two-year-old son. Her eight-year-old daughter was asleep in another bedroom. Just before 6:00 a.m., appellant Allen Suggs, Jr. broke into A.B.'s apartment through a balcony door and entered A.B.'s bedroom. A.B. woke suddenly, saw Suggs standing in front of her with a knife, and screamed. Suggs told her several times to "shut up" or he would kill her. When A.B. asked if she could put her son in another room, Suggs told her to be quiet. He then pulled A.B.'s pajama bottoms down and fondled her as she lay on the bed. This woke A.B.'s son. A.B. struggled and Suggs dragged her onto the floor, held the knife to her stomach and to her back, performed oral sex on her, inserted his finger into her vagina, and threatened to kill her.
As A.B. struggled, she screamed to her daughter to call 911. A.B.'s screams woke her daughter, who came to the bedroom and saw Suggs on top of her mother. A.B.'s daughter ran to a neighbor's apartment and called the police. Suggs remained on top of A.B., punched her repeatedly in the head, and caused lesions, swelling, and bruises on A.B.'s face. Eventually, A.B. was able to take away the knife, and Suggs fled.
Based on these facts, the district court departed from the sentencing guidelines.
DECISION
The decision to depart from the sentencing guidelines rests within the district court's discretion and will not be reversed absent a clear abuse of that discretion. State v. Schmit, 601 N.W.2d 896, 898 (Minn. 1999). When a district court departs from the presumptive sentence, it must state substantial and compelling circumstances that justify the departure. Id. Generally, in determining whether to make a sentencing departure, the district court must determine "whether the defendant's conduct was significantly more or less serious than that typically involved in the commission of the crime in question." State v. Broten, 343 N.W.2d 38, 41 (Minn. 1984).
If the record supports findings that substantial and compelling circumstances exist, this court will not modify the departure unless it has a "strong feeling" that the sentence is disproportional to the offense. State v. Anderson, 356 N.W.2d 453, 454 (Minn. App. 1984) (citation omitted). If the district court's reasons justify the departure, the departure will be allowed. Williams v. State, 361 N.W.2d 840, 844 (Minn. 1985).
The district court sentenced Suggs to 130 months in prison. The presumptive sentence was 98 months. See Minn. Stat. ยงรก609.342, subd. 2 (1998); Minn. Sent. Guidelines IV, V. Suggs agreed to plead guilty and to receive a sentence between 98 and 144 months. The district court departed durationally because Suggs assaulted A.B. in her bedroom while her two young children were present.
Suggs argues that the children's presence does not warrant a departure because he did not thr
Page 1 2 3 Minnesota Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|