State of Minnesota, Respondent,

This opinion is nonprecedential except as provided by
Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 136.01, subd. 1(c).

STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
A20-1095

State of Minnesota,
Respondent,

vs.

Aaron Dante Moreno,
Appellant.

Filed March 22, 2021
Reversed and remanded
Hooten, Judge

Benton County District Court
File No. 05-CR-18-1633

Keith Ellison, Attorney General, St. Paul, Minnesota; and

Philip K. Miller, Benton County Attorney, Karl Schmidt, Assistant County Attorney,
Foley, Minnesota (for respondent)

Cathryn Middlebrook, Chief Appellate Public Defen der, Laura Geyer Heinrich, Assistant
Public Defender, St. Paul, Minnesota (for appellant)

Considered and decided by Hooten , Presiding Judge; Johnson , Judge; and Slieter ,
Judge.
NONPRECEDENTIAL OPINION
HOOTEN, Judge
In this appeal from his conviction for aggravated robbery, appellant argues that the
district court erred in denying his request for a restitution hearing because the Minnesota
governor’s executive order suspending district court statutory filing deadlines tolled the

2
30-day period in which a request to challenge restitution must be brought. We reverse and
remand.
FACTS
After an incident occurring in August 2018, the state charged appellant Aaron Dante
Moreno with seven felony counts, including aggravated robbery in the first degree (count
two), in violation of Minn. Stat. § 609.245, subd. 1 (2018). At the plea and sentencing
hearing on March 3, 2020, Moreno pleaded guilty to count two, and the state dismissed the
other counts. As part of a plea agreement , Moreno agreed to pay a fine, as well as
restitution to the victim, the Minnesota Crime Victims’ Reparation Board, or both, “at an
amount determined by the [district] [c]ourt at sentencing,” but the plea agreement did not
specify the amount of restitution to be paid. At the plea and sentencing hearing, the parties
agreed to a 156-month sentence, which was a 24-month upward aggravated departure from
the presumptive sentencing guideline range. However, the parties also agreed that the
sentence would satisf y Moreno’s pending federal criminal matter and eliminate any new
charges from the federal government on another matter. On March 3, 2020, the district
court sentenced Moreno to 156 months in prison and ordered him to pay $985 in restitution
to the victim and $1,852.53 to the Minnesota Crime Victims Reparations Board.
On March 13, 2020, Minnesota Governor Timothy Walz issued Emergency
Executive Order 20 -1 (the executive order) declaring a peacetime emergency due to the
spread of the infectious disease COVID-19 and the resulting pandemic. On April 15, 2020,
Governor Walz signed 2020 Minn. Laws ch. 74, art. 1—entitled “the COVID 19 Policy”—
into law. Section 16 of the law provides that

3
[t]he running of deadlines imposed by statutes governing
proceedings in the district and appellate courts, including any
statutes of limitations or other time periods prescribed by
statute, is suspended during the peacetime emergency declared
on March 13, 2020, in governor’s Executive Order 20 -01 and
any extensions authorized under Minnesota Statutes, section
12.31, subdivision 2, and for 60 days after the end of the
peacetime emergency declaration.

2020 Minn. Laws ch. 74, art. 1, § 16. The law “applies to all deadlines that had not expired
as of March 13, 2020.” Id.
On A pril 29, 2020, Moreno, acting pro se, filed a request in district court for a
contested restitution hearing pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 611A.045 (2020). The district court
denied Moreno’s request for a restitution hearing as untimely. In its order denying
Moreno’s request, the district court stated that although Minn. Stat. § 611A.045, subd. 3(b)
(2020) required Moreno to file his request within 30 days of receiving notice of the
restitution order, and although Moreno received notice of this filing deadline both orally
and in writing at the sentencing hearing, he still “failed to submit his request for a contested
restitution hearing within a timely manner.” The order did not address 2020 Minn. Laws
ch. 74, art. 1, § 16, which suspended statutorily-created filing deadlines. Moreno appeals.
DECISION
As part of a felony sentence, the district court may order an offender to pay
restitution to a crime victim. Minn. Stat. § 609.10, subd. 2 (2018). An offender may
challenge restitution by filing a written request for a hearing within 30 days of receiving
written notice of the restitution requested, or within 30 days of sentencing, whichever is
later. Minn. Sta t. § 611A.045, subd. 3(b) . “[I]f the defendant challenges the restitution

4
amount sought, the statute requires the court to conduct a restitution hearing.” State v.
Willis, 898 N.W.2d 642, 648 n.8 (Minn. 2017).
We review issues of statutory interpretation de novo. State v. Stay , 935 N.W.2d
428, 430 (Minn. 2019). “Under the de novo standard, we do not defer to the analysis of
the courts below, but instead we exercise independent review.” Wheeler v. State , 909
N.W.2d 558, 563 (Minn. 2018).
Moreno contends that the district court erred in denying his request for a restitution
hearing as untimely because 2020 Minn. Laws ch. 74, art. 1, § 16 suspended the 30 -day
filing deadline to request a restitution hearing under Minn. Stat. § 611A.045, subd. 3(b).
The state submitted a letter stating that it does not intend to file a brief in this matter.
Therefore, we decide the appeal on the merits. See Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 142.03.
On April 15, 2020, Governor Walz signed 2020 Minn. Laws ch. 74, art. 1, § 16 into
law retroactively suspending all statutorily -created filing deadlines that “had not expired
as of Mar ch 13, 2020.” The governor ordered the suspension to continue “during the
peacetime emergency . . . and for 60 days after the end of the peacetime emergency
declaration” or until “February 15, 2021, whichever is earlier.” 2020 Minn. Laws ch. 74,
art. 1, § 16. At Moreno’s sentencing on March 3, 2020, the district court ordered him to
pay restitution, which triggered the 30-day period in which to request a restitution hearing
under Minn. Stat. § 611A.045, subd. 3(b). Moreno’s deadline to request a hearing had not
expired as of March 13, 2020 and thus 2020 Minn. Laws ch. 74, art. 1, § 16 tolled Moreno’s
30-day statutory deadline to request a restitution hearing until “60 days after the end of the
peacetime emergency declaration” or until “ February 15, 2021 , whichever is earlier.”

5
When Moreno filed his request for a restitution hearing on April 29, 2020, the peacetime
emergency declaration remained in effect after being extended through May 13, 2020 by
Governor Walz’s Executive Order 20 -35. Therefore, the suspension of Moreno’s 30 -day
statutory deadline to file a written request for a restitution hearing also remained in effect,
making his April 29, 2020 request timely.
Because the district court does not have discretion to deny a restitution hearing when
the defendant’s request is timely, the district court erred by denying Moreno’s request, and
we reverse the district court’s denial of relief and remand to the district court with
instructions to schedule a restitution hearing.
Reversed and remanded.