State v. Powell
Opinion
FILED
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
SEPTEMBER 28, 2023 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2023 ND 176
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v.
Daniel Wayne Powell, Defendant and Appellant
No. 20230107
Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Reid A. Brady, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Derek K. Steiner, Assistant State’s Attorney, Fargo, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
Laura C. Ringsak, Bismarck, N.D., for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.
State v. Powell No. 20230107
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Daniel Wayne Powell appeals from an amended criminal judgment entered on a conditional plea of guilty, reserving the right to appeal a district court order denying his motion to suppress evidence. Powell argues the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress evidence because the application for search warrant contained false or misleading information. He also argues the application lacked corroborating evidence of the confidential source, and lacked sufficient detail on the canine’s alert. The district court found the application for search warrant did not contain statements that were knowingly or intentionally false or made with reckless disregard for the truth. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
[¶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
2023 ND 176 (State v. Powell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.