Cited by

-90 (Minn. 2012) (concluding, in the context of second-degree assault, that a defendant’s firing of a gun into an occupied apartment resulted in multiple victims because each occupant was placed at risk of harm).

(stating that Minn. Stat. § 609.035 generally “prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident” (quotation omitted)).

“Whether an offense is subject to multiple sentences under Minn. Stat. § 609.035 is a question of law, which [appellate courts] review de novo.” d 586, 590 (Minn. 2012).

14 of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted).

“Whether an offense is subject to multiple sentences under [section 609.035] is a question of law, which [appellate courts] review de novo.”

Minnesota Statutes section 609.035 “generally prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted).

(stating that section 609.

“Minnesota Statutes § 609.035 generally prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted).

utes more than one offense under the laws of this state, the person may be punished for only one of the offenses and a conviction or acquittal of any one of them is a bar to prosecution for any other of them.” This statute “generally ‘prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.’ ” ().

sota Statutes section 609.035, subdivision 1, provides that, “if a person’s conduct constitutes more than one offense under the laws of this state, the person may be punished for only one of the offenses.” Section 609.035 “generally prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted).

1 (2018), which provides that, “if a person’s conduct constitutes more than one offense under the laws of this state, the person may be punished for only one of the offenses.” This section “generally prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted).

The purpose of the statute is to “protect against exaggerating the criminality of a person’s conduct and to make both punishment and prosecution commensurate with culpability.” (quotation omitted).

5 “[T]he law generally ‘prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.’” (d 586, 589 (Minn. 2012)); see also Minn. Stat. § 609.035, subd.

Minnesota law “generally prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted); see also Minn. 8 Stat. § 609.035 (2020).

(“Under the multiple- victim exception, courts are not prevented from giving a defendant multiple sentences for multiple crimes arising out of a single behavioral incident if: (1) the crimes affect multiple victims; and (2) multiple sentences do not unfairly exaggerate the criminality of the defen

1 (2018) (“[I]f a person’s conduct constitutes more than one offense under the laws of this state, the person may be punished for only one of the offenses.”); State v. Ferguson , (explaining that Minn. Stat. § 609.035 “contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the most serious of the offenses arising out of a single behavioral incident” (quotation omitted)); State v. Papadakis , (“Possession of two controlled substances at

1 (2016), “if a person’s conduct constitutes more than one offense under the laws of this state, the person may be punished for only one of the offenses.” This statute “generally prohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” State v. Ferguson , (M inn.

16 Minnesota law “generally pr ohibits multiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted); see also Minn. Stat. § 609.035 (2016).

See State v. Cox , (stating that whether Minne sota law precludes multiple convictions for 21 separate offenses is a question of law); State v. Ferguson , (“Whether an offense is subject to multiple sentences under Minn. Stat. § 609.035 is a question of law, which we review de novo.”).

This statute “g enerally prohibits mu ltiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” State v. Ferguson , (quotation omitted).

d 586, 590 (Minn. 2012).

the general rule in avoidance-of-apprehension cases, he neglects to mention an important judicially-created exception under which courts may impose multiple sentences for “crimes aris ing out of a single be havioral incident if: (1) the crimes affect multiple victims; and (2) multiple sentences do not unfairly exaggerate the criminality of the defendant’s conduct.” See State v. Ferguson , (quoting State v. Skipintheday , ).

This is because section 609.035 “contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the most serious of the offenses arising from a single behavioral incident.” (internal quotation marks omitted).

See, -890 (Minn. 2012) (identifying and applying the multiple victims exception to uphold separate conviction s and separate sentences for each occupant of the building that was shot at by the defendant).

we conclude that Minn. Stat. § 609.035 (2018) does not prohibit the sentences.

We review de novo “[w]hether an offense is subject to multiple sentences under Minn. Stat. § 609.035.” State v. Ferguson , 90 (Minn. 2012) (citing State v. Skipintheday , ).

“Section 609.035 contemplates that a defendant will be punished for the most serious of the offense s arising out of a single behavioral incident because imposing up to the maximum punishment for the most serious offense will include 7 punishment for all offenses.” 3 State v. Ferguson , (citation omitted) (internal quotations marks omitted).

“Whether an offense is subj ect to multiple sentences under Minn. Stat. § 609.035 is a question of law, which [appellate courts] review de novo.”

This statute “generally prohibits mu ltiple sentences, even concurrent sentences, for two or more offenses that were committed as part of a single behavioral incident.” (quotation omitted).