Summary
The Minnesota Supreme Court considered whether its decision in State v. Her, requiring a jury finding or defendant admission before imposing a 10-year conditional-release term for failure to register as a predatory offender, applied retroactively to Brian Meger’s final sentence. The court held that Her announced a new rule of constitutional criminal procedure under Teague v. Lane and therefore did not apply on collateral review. The court reversed and remanded for reinstatement of Meger’s conditional-release term.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether State v. Her announced a new rule of federal constitutional criminal procedure or merely applied an old rule.
- Whether State v. Her applies retroactively on collateral review to Meger's amended sentence, which became final before Her was decided.
- Whether Meger's 10-year conditional-release term was an illegal sentence correctable under Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure 27.03, subdivision 9.
Holdings
- State v. Her announced a new rule of constitutional criminal procedure because, when Meger's amended sentence became final, reasonable jurists would not have been compelled by existing precedent to conclude that an offender's risk level fell outside the prior-conviction exception to the Sixth Amendment jury-trial requirement.
- State v. Her does not apply retroactively to Meger's amended sentence because Her announced a new rule and Meger did not invoke either of Teague's narrow exceptions for retroactive application of a new rule on collateral review.
- Meger's motion to correct his sentence should have been denied because the conditional-release term was lawful when imposed; a sentence is eligible for correction under Rule 27.03, subdivision 9 only if it was illegal at the time it was imposed.
Key quotations
“Accordingly, we conclude that Her is a new rule that is not retroactive to Meger’s amended sentence.” (at 425)
“Because Her does not apply retroactively to Meg-er’s amended sentence, Meger’s period of conditional release was not unlawful at the time it was imposed.” (at 425)
Factual background
Meger was required to register as a predatory offender and pleaded guilty to failing to register in exchange for a 20-month sentence. Several months after sentencing, the district court added a 10-year conditional-release term based on a Department of Corrections letter stating that Meger was a risk-level-III offender. After State v. Her held that a risk-level-III finding must be admitted by the defendant or found by a jury beyond a reasonable doubt, Meger sought correction of his sentence under Minnesota Rule of Criminal Procedure 27.03, subdivision 9.
Procedural history
Meger pleaded guilty in 2006 to failing to register as a predatory offender and received a 20-month sentence. The district court later added a 10-year conditional-release term based on a Department of Corrections determination that Meger was a risk-level-III offender. After the Minnesota Supreme Court decided State v. Her, the district court vacated the conditional-release term, and the court of appeals affirmed. The Supreme Court reversed and remanded for reinstatement of the conditional-release term.
Remand instructions
Remand to the district court to reinstate Meger's conditional-release term and conduct any further proceedings consistent with the opinion as necessary.