Minnesota Lawyer
Appellant challenged the District Court’s denial of her motion for a durational departure, arguing that her sentence for second-degree possession of methamphetamine should have been shorter because her conduct was less serious than conduct in a typical drug-possession case and because her sentence was unjustifiably disparate when compared to similarly situated offenders. The Court of Appeals concluded that it would not interfere with the District Court’s decision to impose the presumptive sentence. Affirmed.
A14-1847 State v. Eaton (Olmsted County)
