State v. Mitchell

Summary

The court affirmed Mitchell's convictions and sentence, holding that he failed to overcome the presumption of competency and that the district court followed the required competency procedures. The court also held that the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to order a presentencing mental evaluation sua sponte. Finally, it held that applying Mitchell's criminal history score to calculate the mandatory minimum period before parole on his life sentence was lawful because a life sentence is neither a base nor a nonbase sentence and is not converted into a grid sentence.