State v. Hamilton
This text of 2025 ND 224 (State v. Hamilton) 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
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2025 ND 224
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Adam Scott Hamilton, Defendant and Appellant
No. 20250307
Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Jay D. Knudson, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Sarah W. Gereszek, Assistant State’s Attorney, Grand Forks, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
Jamie L. Schaible, Fargo, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief. State v. Hamilton No. 20250307
[¶1] Adam Hamilton appeals from an order of the district court granting the State’s motion to remove a condition from Hamilton’s criminal judgment that had required money from his prison account to be applied to his child support obligations. The State brought the motion after learning all of Hamilton’s children were over eighteen years old and had finished high school. The State asserts the motion was brought pursuant to N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(a)(2). We review orders amending a criminal judgment pursuant to Rule 35(a)(2) for an abuse of discretion. State v. Comes, 2019 ND 99, ¶¶ 4, 8, 926 N.W.2d 117. After reviewing the record, we conclude the court did not abuse its discretion by granting the motion and summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Douglas A. Bahr
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2025 ND 224, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hamilton-nd-2025.