Hennepin County District Court File No. 27-CR-09-20793
Mamady Kalifa Keita, Bayport, Minnesota (pro se appellant)
Lori Swanson, Attorney General, St. Paul, Minnesota; and Michael O. Freeman, Hennepin County Attorney, Jean Burdorf, Assistant County Attorney, Minneapolis, Minnesota (for respondent)
Considered and decided by Bjorkman, Presiding Judge; Ross, Judge; and Kirk, Judge.
Mamady Keita appeals from a district court order denying his petition for postconviction relief from his 2009 conviction of two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and one count of first-degree burglary. Keita argues that the postconviction court erred by failing to address his ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim, by finding that he was properly sentenced, and by holding that his other claims are procedurally barred under State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 243 N.W.2d 737 (1976). Because we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Keita's petition for postconviction relief, we affirm.
Mamady Keita and his friend DeAngelo Madison raped K.W. in her home on April 1, 2009. State v. Keita, No. A10-766, 2011 WL 978237, at *1 (Minn.App. Mar 22, 2011), review denied (Minn. May 25, 2011). After the rape, the men took her clothes and cellular telephone, forced her to shower, and threatened her. Id. Keita was charged with two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct and one count of first-degree burglary. Id. After trial, the jury convicted Keita on all counts and the district court sentenced him to 281 months in prison. Id.
Keita appealed from his conviction, arguing that prosecutorial misconduct robbed him of a fair trial and that he received an incorrect sentence. He also argued that the state introduced insufficient evidence, that he received ineffective assistance of trial counsel, and that the state failed to call key witnesses. Id. We held that Keita was fairly tried but that he had been improperly sentenced due to an incorrect criminal-history score. Keita, 2011 WL 978237, at *1, *4, *5. The district court resentenced Keita to consecutive prison terms of 81 months for the burglary conviction and 172 months for the criminal-sexual-conduct conviction for a total sentence of 253 months.
Keita filed a petition for postconviction relief, arguing that he was improperly sentenced, that the jury received improper instructions, that the prosecutor's misconduct deprived him of a fair trial, that there was insufficient evidence to convict him, that the trial court judge was partial, and that his appellate counsel provided him ineffective assistance. The district court denied his petition. Keita appeals.
We review a postconviction proceeding only to determine whether sufficient evidence exists to sustain the postconviction court's findings, and we do not disturb the postconviction decision absent an abuse of discretion. White v. State, 711 N.W.2d 106, 109 (Minn. 2006). We do not consider postconviction claims that were raised in a direct appeal or that should have been known and raised in that appeal. Jones v. State, 671 N.W.2d 743, 746 (Minn. 2003); State v. Knaffla, 309 Minn. 246, 252, 243 N.W.2d 737, 741 (1976).
Keita first argues that the district court erred by failing to review his ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim. He asserts that this claim is not barred because it was not available on direct ...