Minnesota judges do not always have to abide by sentencing laws in gun cases

In 2008, a man attacked a woman in Florida and was convicted of a felony. According to KARE 11, he was arrested in Minnesota a few years later and charged with carrying a handgun. State law mandates that a felon cannot possess a gun.

As any criminal defense attorney in Minneapolis knows, the mandatory minimum sentence for such an offense is five years in prison. However, a judge only sentenced the man to a year in a workhouse and probation with no time in prison.
This is not the only instance in which a judge has strayed from sentencing guidelines. In fact, a recent report reveals that in the majority of gun crime cases in Minneapolis, the mandatory minimum sentences were not applied.

By the numbers

KARE 11 conducted a study that reviewed every felony gun crime across the state of Minnesota for the past three years. The station’s report shows that in 53 percent of the cases statewide, judges issued less than the current mandatory minimum sentences. Narrowed down to just Hennepin County, 56 percent of the sentences did not meet the minimum requirements. In Carlton County, judges gave less than the minimum sentence in every case over the last three years.

A criminal defense attorney in Minneapolis understands that it is possible for the prosecution to object to sentences. However, the KARE 11 investigation found that prosecuting attorneys only objected in 12 percent of the cases across the state in which a judge handed down a lessened sentence.

Why it happens

Minnesota statutes outline the minimum sentences of imprisonment for those convicted of crimes, including gun charges. However, there is a section in the current state law that permits judges to avoid the minimum sentencing if there are compelling and substantial reasons to do so. Some of those reasons could involve the following:

  • The defendant was not the aggressor.
  • The defendant accepted responsibility.
  • The defendant showed remorse.

There are some guidelines that are referred to as “mandatory sentences,” which do not permit a judge to issue a lesser punishment. These sentencing laws apply to people who are convicted for a second gun offense. Yet KARE 11 did find one instance in which a man who was convicted twice of a gun crime did not receive the minimum sentence.

By and large, judges do have the power to issue punishment at their discretion with or without regard to sentencing guidelines. Anyone with questions regarding this topic should consult with a criminal defense attorney in Minneapolis.

Max Keller has won countless jury trial cases involving misdemeanors and felonies, sex crimes, and DWI’s. He is a member of the Minnesota Society for Criminal Justice, which only allows the top 50 criminal defense attorneys in the state as members. Max is a frequent speaker at CLE’s and is often asked for advice by other defense attorneys across Minnesota.

Years of Experience: Approx. 20 years
Minnesota Registration Status: Active
Bar & Court Admissions: State of Minnesota Minnesota State Court Minnesota Federal Court 8th Circuit Federal Court of Appeals State of Maryland

What to Do If You Have Been Charged with a Criminal Offense

The Surprising Cost of a Guilty Criminal Plea in Minnesota

Defendants in Minnesota may plead guilty or accept deals without understanding the hidden cost of a guilty criminal plea. A guilty criminal plea, regardless of how appealing it appears, can leave you dealing with substantial lifelong consequences. You may skip lengthy trial proceedings and likely get a lenient sentence, but end up with a criminal record. The record can lead to various financial and collateral consequences, including difficulty in securing employment, loss of housing rights, license revocation, and immigration issues.

What You Can Expect at a Pre-Trial Motions Hearing in Minnesota

The pre-trial motions hearing is a court session you attend after your first arraignment. At the hearing, the prosecution and defense appear before a judge to clear several details about the case before trial. These details include pre-trial motions, evidentiary queries, and constitutional matters.

Refusing Arrest vs. Resisting Arrest in Minnesota: What’s the Difference?

Highly publicized incidents of police using excessive force over the past few years have led to people wondering, “What’s the difference between refusing arrest vs. resisting arrest?” Resisting arrest in Minnesota occurs when you use force to prevent a police officer from making a lawful arrest. Refusing an arrest, on the other hand, involves statements or actions that show reluctance to cooperate with an officer’s instructions without using force.