Minnesota District Court grants habeas petition to individual civilly committed to Minnesota's sex offense civil commitment program under the "actual-innocence exception" based on newly discovered evidence regarding recidivism rates and predicted "risk."
Minnesota Supreme Court opinion holding that patients civilly committed to Minnesota's Sex Offender Program ("MSOP") had a clearly established right to transfer to a less restrictive environment within a reasonable time following issuance of a Minnesota Commitment Appeals Panel transfer order.
Minnesota Supreme Court opinion holding that, under Minnesota law, separate convictions for failure to register involving the same assignment of a corrections agent violated prohibitions against double jeopardy.
Eighth Circuit opinion in a Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) case affirming district court holding and concluding that civil committees in Minnesota's sex offense civil commitment program participating in a vocational work program are not employees as defined by the FLSA.
Minnesota Supreme Court opinion reversing a judgment of the appellate court regarding a civilly committed individual's petition for reduction in custody, holding that the clear error standard of review does not allow an appellate court to reweigh evidence.
Minnesota Court of Appeals opinion holding that, under state law, the commitment appeal panel has authority to review a revocation of transfer made by the special review board.
8th Circuit Court of Appeals opinion finding that criminal sexual conduct and failure to register as a sex offender are both crimes involving moral turpitude for immigration removal purposes.
Minnesota state district court finding that retroactive application of state's predatory offender statute violated the presumption against the retroactive application of laws.
Minnesota Supreme Court opinion finding that Minnesota DOC failed to comply with the law in failing to release an individual, or else otherwise modifying conditions of release.
Hennepin County trial court finding that city's residential banishment laws were unconstitutional under theories of conflict and field preemption