With no explanation, chose the best option from "A", "B", "C" or "D". punishment when other subdivisions within Minn.Stat. § 609.66 refer specifically to crimes committed in a park. Compare id., subd. la(b)(l) (authorizing a more severe penalty for a nondrive-by reckless discharge of a firearm when committed in a park zone) with id., subd. le (outlining penalties for a felony drive-by shooting without consideration of location). B. Other bases for departure We next consider whether the other factors identified by the lower courts would justify a departure, specifically the indiscriminate firing of multiple shots into a group. Appellant argues that a departure on these facts was an abuse of discretion as they are the predicate facts upon which the presumptive sentence for a drive-by shooting is based. See State v. Brusven, 327 N.W.2d 591, 594 (Minn.1982) (<HOLDING>). The definitions of the relevant crimes are

A: holding circuit courts decision to depart from the presumptive sentencing recommendation and impose a prison sentence was reversible error where defendant objected on the basis that the state failed to give notice of aggravating factors that would justify a dispositional departure from the presumptive sentencing recommendation and the trial court failed to state on the record a reason for its departure
B: holding it was unfair for the trial court to rely upon factors already considered in the presumptive sentence as a basis for a durational departure
C: holding that trial court must determine presumptive amount under guidelines before considering other factors
D: holding district court correctly reversed a departure sentence where the trial court failed to provide written reasons for the departure
B.