Bilbro v. State

Summary

The Minnesota Supreme Court reversed the court of appeals and held that Bilbro's consecutive sentences for attempted second-degree intentional murder and second-degree criminal sexual conduct were not authorized by law. The court remanded for imposition of concurrent sentences and granted Bilbro's motion to strike the portion of the State's brief addressing treatment of his sentencing motion as a postconviction petition.

Holdings

1. The consecutive sentences were not authorized by law, and Bilbro must receive concurrent sentences.
2. The State's response brief was stricken to the extent it argued that the district court correctly treated Bilbro's motion as a postconviction petition.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court lawfully imposed consecutive sentences for Bilbro's two offenses under the Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines.
2. Whether the State waived its argument that Bilbro's Rule 27.03 motion was properly treated as a postconviction petition.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded