Constitutional Law – Equal Protection; Dishonored Check

admin//July 5, 2010//

Listen to this article

Where defendant was charged with the felony of issuing dishonored checks-value more than $500, in violation of Minn. Stat. sec. 609.535, subd. 2a(a)(1) (2008), and was not charged with theft by check under Minn. Stat. sec. 609.52, subd. 2(3)(i) (2008), which is a gross misdemeanor; we conclude that the disparity in the severity of punishment for the two offenses does not constitute an equal-protection violation because the disparity in sentences does not shock the senses, the dishonored-check statute is more specific than the general theft statute, and the legislature did not exceed its authority to classify crimes and prescribe punishment where the statutes cover different acts.

Certified question answered in the negative.

A09-1958 Minnesota v. Cox (Swift County)

CLICK FOR FULL TEXT