Delaney v. State
This text of 2014 ND 27 (Delaney v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Filed 2/13/14 by Clerk of Supreme Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2014 ND 27
Robert Earnest Delaney, Petitioner and Appellant
v.
State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
No. 20130260
Appeal from the District Court of Morton County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Bruce A. Romanick, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Charles A. Stock, 407 North Broadway, P.O. Box 605, Crookston, Minn. 56716-0605, for petitioner and appellant; on brief.
Brian D. Grosinger, Assistant State’s Attorney, 210 Second Avenue NW, Mandan, N.D. 58554, for respondent and appellee; on brief.
Delaney v. State
[¶1] Robert Delaney appeals from a district court order denying his application for post-conviction relief. Delaney argues the court erred in finding he was not denied effective assistance of counsel and in not ensuring he voluntarily and knowingly waived his constitutional right to testify. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7), holding that the court’s conclusion is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous and that “the court does not have a duty to verify that the defendant who is not testifying has waived his or her right voluntarily” under State v. Mulske , 2007 ND 43, ¶ 11, 729 N.W.2d 129.
[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Dale V. Sandstrom
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2014 ND 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/delaney-v-state-nd-2014.