Etemad v. State

2022 ND 81, 972 N.W.2d 928

Opinion

FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT APRIL 14, 2022 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2022 ND 81

Bejan David Etemad, Petitioner and Appellant v. State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

No. 20210343

Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Jay D. Knudson, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Scott O. Diamond, Fargo, ND, for petitioner and appellant.

Ashlei A. Neufeld, Assistant State’s Attorney, Grand Forks, ND, for respondent and appellee. Etemad v. State No. 20210343

[¶1] Bejan David Etemad appealed from a district court order denying his amended application for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Etemad argues the district court erred in finding that he knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to counsel. Following a post-conviction evidentiary hearing, the court found that Etemad knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his right to counsel. We conclude the district court’s findings are not clearly erroneous and the court did not err in denying Etemad’s application for post- conviction relief. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte