The 9½-year prison sentence a Two Harbors man received after admitting that he took part in a Congdon Park home invasion has been affirmed by the Minnesota Court of Appeals, but the convict will get another day in court regarding the restitution he must pay his victims.
In a decision released Tuesday, the appeals court ruled that the district court did not abuse its discretion in declining to grant probation to Jonathan Phipps, who pleaded guilty to first-degree burglary and two counts of kidnapping in connection with the Aug. 30, 2007 incident.
District Court Judge Shaun Floerke told Phipps at sentencing "you reap as you have sown," and handed down a guideline prison sentence.
Phipps had argued on appeal that he could make positive contributions with the support of his family and his faith if placed on probation. He claimed that the district court failed to exercise its discretion by not considering evidence that he was amenable to a probationary sentence.
Phipps and David Schiller entered the home on the 3400 block of East First Street, each armed with a gun. They woke the mother and her son, who were sleeping in their bedrooms, tied their hands with electrical zip ties and made them lie on the floor. The victims told police that one of the men threatened to shoot the boy if the mother didn't tell them what they wanted to know.
ADVERTISEMENT
Schiller pleaded guilty to first-degree burglary and kidnapping in masterminding the home invasion. He also was sentenced to 9½ years in prison. Both men were ordered to pay a total of more than $22,000 in restitution to the victims.
Both men appealed the district court's decision on restitution. Schiller claimed that the district court abused its discretion in awarding the restitution to the victims, which included more than $13,000 to cut trees to make room for new lighting and security around the home.
In December, the appeals court granted Schiller's request that a hearing be held to determine the amount of restitution. In Tuesday's order, the appeals court also reversed the district court's restitution order in Phipps' case and remanded it to the district court for reconsideration, suggesting that the district court could join Schiller's and Phipps' appeals of restitution into a single proceeding.
