Phillips v. State
This text of 2017 ND 223 (Phillips 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
[¶ 1] Casey Phillips appeals from a district court order denying his application for post-conviction relief. In 2012, Phillips pled guilty to terrorizing and criminal trespass. Phillips applied for post-conviction relief, which the district court denied and the Supreme Court affirmed. Phillips v. State, 2014 ND 100, 859 N.W.2d 929. In 2016, Phillips applied for post-conviction relief based on his claim of newly discovered evidence and ineffective assistance of counsel. The district court summarily dismissed the application for failure to present competent, admissible evidence likely to change the result of the trial. The district court ruled N.D.C.C. § 29 — 32.-1—09(2) precluded Phillips’ ineffective assistance of counsel claim. On appeal, Phillips argues the district court erred in summarily dismissing his application because the alleged newly discovered evidence raised a genuine issue of material fact sufficient for an evidentiary hearing. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2017 ND 223, 902 N.W.2d 512, 2017 N.D. LEXIS 226, 2017 WL 4159229, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillips-v-state-nd-2017.