This opinion will be unpublished and
may not be cited except as provided by
Minn. Stat. § 480A.08, subd. 3 (2000).
STATE OF MINNESOTA
IN COURT OF APPEALS
State of Minnesota,
Arthur Francis Green,
Reversed and Remanded
St. Louis County District Court
File No. K793100671
Mike Hatch, Attorney General, 525 Park Street, Suite 500, St. Paul, MN 55103; and
Alan Mitchell, St. Louis County Attorney, 100 North Fifth Street, #501, Duluth, MN 55802-2034 (for respondent)
John M. Stuart, State Public Defender, Mark F. Anderson, Assistant State Public Defender, 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Suite 600, Minneapolis, MN 55414 (for appellant)
Considered and decided by Harten, Presiding Judge, Kalitowski, Judge, and Peterson, Judge.
U N P U B L I S H E D O P I N I O N
Appellant Arthur Francis Green contends that the district court erred in refusing to vacate a 10-year conditional-release term from his sentence for an offense committed on June 2, 1990. We reverse and remand.
D E C I S I O N
Appellant contends that the Minnesota legislature expressly stated that the conditional-release requirement in Minn. Stat. § 609.346, subd. 5(a) (now codified at Minn. Stat. § 609.109, subd. 7 (2000)) does not apply to offenses committed prior to August 1, 1992. We agree. Whether a statute has been properly construed is a question of law subject to de novo review. State v. Murphy, 545 N.W.2d 909, 914 (Minn. 1996).
In 1992, the legislature enacted an amendment to section 609.346 requiring district courts to impose a minimum supervised-release term for persons convicted of particular sex offenses. 1992 Minn. Laws ch. 571, art. 1, § 25. In enacting this law, the legislature specifically provided that the amendment did not become effective until August 1, 1992, and did not apply to crimes committed prior to that date. 1992 Minn. Laws ch. 571, art. 1, § 29. In 1993, the legislature changed the terminology in the statute from “supervised release” to “conditional release,” but did not alter the effective date. 1993 Minn. Laws ch. 326, art. 9, § 9.
Appellant was convicted of second-degree criminal sexual conduct for an offense that occurred on June 2, 1990. Because the legislature specifically provided that the required conditional-release term did not apply to offenses committed before August 1, 1992, appellant’s sentence was not authorized by law. See Minn. R. Crim. P. 27.03, subd. 9 (“The court at any time may correct a sentence not authorized by law.”). On remand, the district court shall vacate appellant’s 10-year conditional-release term.
Reversed and remanded.