State v. Heintz

2024 ND 82

Opinion

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2024 ND 82

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v.

Kyle Martin Heintz, Defendant and Appellant

Nos. 20230382–20230385

Appeals from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable Donald Hager, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Kathryn R. Jund, Assistant State’s Attorney, and Victoria J.M. Christian, under the Rule on Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Grand Forks, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.

Kevin McCabe, Dickinson, N.D., for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.

State v. Heintz

Nos. 20230382–20230385

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Kyle Martin Heintz appeals from orders for revocation of probation entered in four criminal cases. He argues the district court abused its discretion by denying his motion to continue the sentencing portion of his revocation proceedings. After review of the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion to continue. We summarily affirm the orders for revocation of probation 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