## Facts

- Nancy Louise Spain, recently displaced from her apartment, moved into the home of her ex-husband, Eugene Letendre.
- After Letendre returned home from drinking and fell asleep, he awoke early the next morning to flames rising from the floor near his bed.
- Letendre attempted to extinguish the fire, suffered burns, and called 911; firefighters put out the fire and he was hospitalized for smoke inhalation and second-degree burns covering about six percent of his body.
- Investigators found a partially burned can of charcoal lighter fluid on the bedroom floor.
- Spain told police she had been asleep on the couch and was awakened by the fire, but responders observed the couch and living room appeared not to have been slept in.
- At trial, Spain claimed Letendre accidentally started the fire with a cigarette; expert testimony on burn patterns supported that the fire was intentionally set.
- A Dakota County jury convicted Spain of first-degree arson; she had no prior criminal history.
- The presumptive Minnesota Sentencing Guidelines sentence was 48 months; the district court imposed 144 months (a triple durational departure), citing the victim’s injuries and the dangerous circumstances.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by imposing a greater-than-double durational departure (144 months) from the 48-month presumptive sentence for first-degree arson without “severe aggravating circumstances.”

## Decision

- The Minnesota Supreme Court affirmed the conviction.
- The court held the record supported aggravating circumstances sufficient for a durational departure, but not “severe aggravating circumstances” justifying a greater-than-double departure.
- The court concluded the triple durational departure was an abuse of discretion.
- The court modified the sentence to 96 months (a double durational departure) and affirmed the sentence as modified.

## Legal Principles

- Sentencing courts must impose the presumptive guidelines sentence unless valid aggravating circumstances justify a departure.
- A double durational departure may be supported by aggravating circumstances; a greater-than-double durational departure is reserved for severe aggravating circumstances.
- The extent of a departure must remain proportional within the guidelines framework, including comparison to presumptive sentences for more serious offenses.
- Appellate courts review the decision to depart, and the extent of the departure, for abuse of discretion and may modify a sentence when the departure magnitude is not justified.

## Conclusion

The court held that although Spain’s arson caused significant injury and occurred under dangerous conditions warranting a double durational departure, the circumstances were not severe enough to justify a triple departure; the sentence was reduced from 144 months to 96 months to maintain guideline proportionality.


State v. Spain, 590 N.W.2d 85 (Minn. 1999)