State v. Sparkman
Opinion
FILED
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
NOVEMBER 9, 2023
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2023 ND 212
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v.
Elden Jojuan Sparkman, Defendant and Appellant
No. 20230134
Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Reid A. Brady, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
SheraLynn Ternes (argued) and Nicholas S. Samuelson (appeared), Assistant State’s Attorneys, Fargo, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee.
Samuel A. Gereszek, Grand Forks, N.D., for defendant and appellant.
State v. Sparkman
No. 20230134
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Elden Jojuan Sparkman appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury trial. Sparkman argues the district court erred by admitting testimonial hearsay evidence through a 911 call, asserting that in the context it was made, “no objection” was meant here to preserve a prior objection to the call. He also argues insufficient evidence supports the conviction. After reviewing the record, we conclude sufficient evidence supports the verdict. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7). See State v. Brewer, 2017 ND 95, ¶ 5, 893 N.W.2d 184 (finding defendant “waived this claim of error when his attorney not only failed to object to the State’s admission of evidence at trial, but unequivocally stated there was ‘no objection’”).
[¶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 212 (State v. Sparkman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.