This opinion will be unpublished and
may not be cited except as provided by
Minn. Stat.  480A.08, subd. 3 (1994).


State of Minnesota,


James Walter Young,

Filed August 13, 1996
Schumacher, Judge

Hennepin County District Court
File No. 91071778

Hubert H. Humphrey III, Attorney General, 1400 NCL Tower, 445 
Minnesota Street, St. Paul, MN 55101 (for Respondent)

Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, Linda K. Jenny, 
Assistant County Attorney, Jean Burdorf, Staff Attorney, C-2000 
Government Center, Minneapolis, MN 55487 (for Respondent)

John M. Stuart, State Public Defender, Evan W. Jones, Assistant 
Public Defender, 2829 University Avenue Southeast, Suite 600, 
Minneapolis, MN 55414 (for Appellant)

	Considered and decided by Norton, Presiding Judge, 
Schumacher, Judge, and Harten, Judge.

U N P U B L I S H E D   O P I N I O N

	James Walter Young appeals the postconviction court's 
denial of his petition to modify consecutive sentencing imposed for 
first- and second-degree assault on two victims, arguing that the 
sentence unfairly exaggerates his culpability.  We affirm.


	On September 28, 1991, Young attacked his former 
girlfriend, J.H., and her sister-in-law, G.H., as they were moving 
J.H.'s belongings from the home she shared with Young.  Young, 
angry at J.H.'s decision to leave him, stabbed her with a butcher's 
knife until the knife broke.  J.H. was stabbed in the chest, back, 
head, and hand.  Among other injuries, her lung was punctured.  
Young also stabbed G.H.  Two of G.H.'s wounds required stitches. 
 Young told the victims that he was going to kill them.
	Young was charged with first- and second-degree attempted 
murder and first- and second-degree assault.  In February 1992, he 
pleaded guilty to one count of first-degree assault and one count of 
second-degree assault, and the attempted murder charges were 
dismissed.  The plea negotiation included a joint recommendation 
for presumptive sentences, imposed consecutively.  He was 
sentenced to 86 months for first-degree assault and 21 months for 
second-degree assault, for a total term of 107 months.
	On March 22, 1995, Young filed a petition for 
postconviction relief, asking the court, among other things, to 
reduce his prison term by running his sentences concurrently rather 
than consecutively.  The postconviction court denied the petition, 
and Young appeals.


	The decision of a postconviction court will not be disturbed 
absent an abuse of discretion.  State v. Kelly, 535 N.W.2d 345, 347 
(Minn. 1995).  A sentencing court should use the presumptive 
sentence unless there are "substantial and compelling 
circumstances."  Minn. Sent. Guidelines I.4; State v. Garcia, 302 
N.W.2d 643, 647 (Minn. 1981).  The decision to impose 
consecutive or concurrent sentences falls within the discretion of 
the sentencing court.  State v. Ouk, 516 N.W.2d 180, 186 (Minn. 
1994).  Under the guidelines, consecutive sentences may be given
[w]hen the offender is convicted of multiple current felony 
convictions for crimes against different persons, and when 
the sentence for the most severe current conviction is 
executed according to the guidelines.
Minn. Sent. Guidelines II.F; see also State v. Beamon, 438 
N.W.2d 397, 399 (Minn. App. 1989) (applying section II.F), 
review denied (Minn. May 12, 1989).  Where there are multiple 
victims, a court may impose one sentence per victim as long as the 
multiple sentences do not unfairly exaggerate the criminality of the 
defendant's conduct.  State v. Norris, 428 N.W.2d 61, 70 (Minn. 
	Young argues that the imposition of consecutive sentences, 
while not a departure from the guidelines, unfairly exaggerates the 
criminality of his conduct.  He argues his offenses "were 
essentially crimes of passion" and his sentence should reflect that.  
We note that a defendant's state of mind does not mitigate the 
severity of the crime for sentencing purposes.  See State v. 
Kissner, 541 N.W.2d 317, 322 (Minn. App. 1995) (multiple 
sentences proper even though offense was nonintentional crime), 
review denied (Minn. Feb. 9, 1996).  Further, Young's sentence 
does not exaggerate the criminality of his conduct.  He stabbed 
both victims while telling them that he would kill them.  He 
stabbed J.H. until the butcher's knife broke.  The victims suffered 
substantial injuries.
	The postconviction court did not abuse its discretion by 
denying Young's petition for postconviction relief.