How JustAnswer Works:
  • Ask an Expert
    Experts are full of valuable knowledge and are ready to help with any question. Credentials confirmed by a Fortune 500 verification firm.
  • Get a Professional Answer
    Via email, text message, or notification as you wait on our site. Ask follow up questions if you need to.
  • 100% Satisfaction Guarantee
    Rate the answer you receive.
Ask dkennedy Your Own Question
dkennedy, Criminal Defense Lawyer
Category: Criminal Law
Satisfied Customers: 6009
Experience:  J.D. degree, 15 years practice
Type Your Criminal Law Question Here...
dkennedy is online now
A new question is answered every 9 seconds

id like to know if mn law allows an inmate whose been convicted

Customer Question

i'd like to know if mn law allows an inmate whose been convicted under federal law since 2003,( has been in custody since then, and was later convicted under mn law in 2010 to serve a consecutive sentence to his original federal sentence) to utilize any and all past cooperation as grounds for a motion to the state court seeking relief or 'modification' of his state sentence.
i.e.:removal of mn detainer replaced by a "notify" request,or change consecutive to concurrent, or reduction of sentence, etc..
if such cooperation could still be seen as being useful and recognizable by the state court due to the fact that the mn investigation related to the aforementioned case was ongoing during the cooperation on the issue, then would the inmate simply seek relief directly to the court or would an attorney submit a motion on the inmates behalf?
Submitted: 5 years ago.
Category: Criminal Law
Expert:  dkennedy replied 5 years ago.

dkennedy :


dkennedy :

I'm pretty clear on what you are asking, but I'm wondering why the request was not made during the time of the sentencing so it would not have been consecutive to the federal sentence? Or was the request made and denied?

JACUSTOMER-t1a4hav1- :

The request was made and the prosecutor denied it. He wanted it to run after the fed time. But it was him alone and not the judge who insisted on this.