State v. Jackson
This text of 2002 ND 105 (State v. Jackson) 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] Michael Darnell Jackson appeals from two East Central Judicial District Court judgments of conviction for failure to register as a convicted sex offender in violation of N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-15, alleging he was denied the effective assistance of counsel because his trial attorney did not move for a judgment of acquittal, under N.D.R.Crim.P. 29(a).
[¶ 2] The issue of ineffective assistance of counsel is best raised in a post-conviction relief proceeding, except in rare cases. State v. Norman, 507 N.W.2d 522, 525 (N.D.1993) (a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel should generally be raised in a post-conviction proceeding). This is a rare ease.
[¶ 3] We hold, as a matter of law, it is not ineffective assistance for counsel to fail to move for a judgment of acquittal, under N.D.R.Crim.P. 29(a), when the prosecution has presented a prima facie case. State v. Kroeplin, 266 N.W.2d 537, 543 (N.D.1978). Here, the State presented a prima facie case. Jackson did not receive ineffective assistance of counsel.
[¶ 4] The district court’s judgments of conviction are affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2002 ND 105, 646 N.W.2d 676, 2002 N.D. LEXIS 136, 2002 WL 1480829, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-jackson-nd-2002.