State v. Sabot

North Dakota Supreme Court

State v. Sabot

2017 ND 280, 904 N.W.2d 469

North Dakota Supreme Court·Decided December 7, 2017·No. 20170100·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

[¶ 1] Eric Sabot appeals from a criminal judgment, entered after a bench trial, finding him guilty of terrorizing. Sabot argues the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to convict him of terrorizing. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3), concluding sufficient evidence supports Sabot’s conviction.

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

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

[¶ 1] Eric Sabot appeals from a criminal judgment, entered after a bench trial, finding him guilty of terrorizing. Sabot argues the evidence presented at trial was insufficient to convict him of terrorizing. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3), concluding sufficient evidence supports Sabot’s conviction.

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

State v. Sabot, 2017 ND 280, 904 N.W.2d 469 (N.D. 2017).

Pincite

2017 ND 280 (State v. Sabot) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related