Ohrt’s attorney established the factual basis for the plea, the court stated: I’m not going to sentence you today. And I will never sentence you if you meet the conditions that I impose on you now. If you do that, then at the end of the two-year period, the plea that you’ve entered today will be crossed out and vacated and the case will be dismissed. ISSUE Did the district court err in staying adjudication of conviction? ANALYSIS The state argues that the district court erred in deferring adjudication of Ohrt’s conviction and in providing that, upon successful completion of probation, the plea would be vacated and the charge dismissed. The state argues that the circumstances of this case do not support a stay of adjudication. See State v. Krotzer, 548 N.W.2d 252, 254-55 (Minn.1996) (<HOLDING>); cf. State v. Foss, 556 N.W.2d 540, 541
holding courts have inherent authority to compel compensation for an attorney appointed to represent an indigent defendant recognizing special circumstances exception recognizing inherent power of courts of appeals recognizing district courts inherent authority to dismiss with prejudice for abuse of judicial process holding that courts have inherent authority in special circumstances to stay adjudication