Craig Matthew Hohenwald v. State of Minnesota, 875 N.W.2d 843

In 2010 Hohenwald was convicted (bench trial) of multiple murders; this Court affirmed the convictions on direct appeal in 2012.
In July 2014 Hohenwald filed a pro se postconviction petition asserting newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance of counsel; the district court denied relief in October 2014 (initial petition) and denied an amended petition as untimely.
Hohenwald filed pro se motions to reconsider the October 2014 orders in November 2014; the district court denied those motions on January 16, 2015.
Hohenwald obtained counsel and filed an appeal on March 16, 2015—almost five months after the October 2014 orders.
The State moved to dismiss the appeal as untimely under Minn. R. Crim. P. 29.03, subd. 3(d) (60-day appeal period) and as to the nonappealability of the order denying reconsideration.
The Supreme Court considered whether the motions to reconsider should be treated as subsequent postconviction petitions and whether those motions tolled the appeal period; it concluded the motions were not subsequent petitions and did not toll the appeal deadline.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Hohenwald's motions to reconsider the district court's October 2014 orders should be treated as subsequent postconviction petitions	Motions should not be treated as new petitions; they were true motions to reconsider or for a new trial	State: treat as motions to reconsider (not new petitions)	Court: not treated as new petitions; they remain motions to reconsider
Whether a motion to reconsider tolls the 60-day appeal deadline for postconviction orders	Hohenwald argued reconsideration tolled the appeal period (implied)	State: motion to reconsider does not toll the appeal period; appeal must be filed within 60 days	Court: motions to reconsider do not toll the 60-day appeal deadline; appellant lacked jurisdiction to appeal the October 2014 orders
Whether the district court's January 16, 2015 order denying reconsideration is independently appealable	Hohenwald attempted to appeal the January 2015 order	State: order denying reconsideration is not independently appealable	Court: denial of reconsideration is not independently appealable; appeal dismissed
Proper procedure when seeking reconsideration of an appealable order	Hohenwald did not follow proper procedure	State: must file notice of appeal then move to stay pending reconsideration	Court: reiterates procedure — file notice of appeal then move to stay; Hohenwald did not do so

State v. Hohenwald, 815 N.W.2d 823 (Minn. 2012) (direct appeal affirming convictions)
State v. Knaffla, 243 N.W.2d 737 (Minn. 1976) (preclusion of successive postconviction claims)
Ford v. State, 690 N.W.2d 706 (Minn. 2005) (appeal deadline is jurisdictional)
Marzitelli v. City of Little Canada, 582 N.W.2d 904 (Minn. 1998) (proper procedure: file notice of appeal then move to stay while seeking reconsideration)
Limongelli v. GAN Nat'l Ins. Co., 590 N.W.2d 167 (Minn. App. 1999) (order denying reconsideration is not independently appealable)