Defendant was convicted of and sentenced for both first degree sale of a controlled substance (sales aggregated over 90 days) and second degree sale of a controlled substance (sale in a school zone). Defendant challenged his convictions, arguing that the trial court erred in admitting evidence of a previous drug possession offense. Defendant also argued that the trial court erred in convicting him of and sentencing him for both the first and second degree sales crimes. The Minnesota Court of Appeals concluded that any error by the trial court in admitting the previous offense evidence was not prejudicial, noting that the testimony regarding the prior offense was brief, the prosecutor made no mention of the evidence in closing argument, and the trial court gave two cautionary instructions on the use of Spreigl evidence. However, the trial court erred in entering a conviction for the the second degree sale offense. Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.
State v. Lester, A17-1248, Waseca County.
Attorney Lynne Torgerson was not attorney of record in this case.