State v. Tully
Opinion
FILED
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
DECEMBER 8, 2022
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2022 ND 218
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v.
David Eugene Tully, Defendant and Appellant
No. 20220214
Appeal from the District Court of Nelson County, Northeast Central Judicial District, the Honorable M. Jason McCarthy, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Jayme J. Tenneson, State’s Attorney, Lakota, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee.
Benjamin C. Pulkrabek, Mandan, N.D., for defendant and appellant.
State v. Tully No. 20220214
Per Curiam.
[¶1] David Tully appeals from a criminal judgment entered after he pled guilty to terrorizing in violation of N.D.C.C. § 12.1-17-04. On appeal, Tully argues that his case should be remanded to the district court to withdraw his guilty plea because the court failed to substantially comply with N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b)(1)(A)-(E) and (3). He did not raise these issues at the district court. We do not address issues raised for the first time on appeal unless they rise to the level of obvious error affecting substantial rights under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b). State v. Hoehn, 2019 ND 222, ¶ 20, 932 N.W.2d 553; State v. Cox, 2017 ND 23, ¶¶ 8, 10, 889 N.W.2d 848. This Court finds no obvious error, and we therefore summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) & (7).
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2022 ND 218 (State v. Tully) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.