State v. Banerjee

2023 ND 3, 984 N.W.2d 380

• Court: North Dakota Supreme Court
• Decided: January 5, 2023
• Docket: 20220266
• Status: Published

Opinion

FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT JANUARY 5, 2023 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2023 ND 3

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Joyanta Banerjee, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20220266

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Reid A. Brady, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Kimberlee J. Hegvik and Nicholas S. Samuelson, Assistant State’s Attorneys, Fargo, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.

Joyanta Banerjee, Fargo, ND, self-represented, defendant and appellant; submitted on brief. State v. Banerjee No. 20220266

[¶1] Joyanta Banerjee appeals from two orders denying his motions for a new trial.

[¶2] Under N.D.R.App.P. 28(b), an appellant’s brief must contain: a table of contents; a statement regarding jurisdiction; a statement of the issues presented for review; a statement of the case indicating the nature of the case; a statement of the facts relevant to the issues, and a legally supported argument regarding the appellant’s issues. We discussed the importance of these requirements in State v. Noack, 2017 ND 82, ¶¶ 7-8, 732 N.W.2d 389. Without the content required by N.D.R.App.P. 28(b), we will decline to review the appellant’s alleged errors.

[¶3] Although Banerjee’s brief contains headings for a statement of facts, a statement of the case, and law and argument, the lack of content following the headings prevents us from providing meaningful or effective appellate review. Therefore, under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8) we summarily affirm the district court’s orders denying Banerjee’s motions for a new trial.

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