Thorstad v. State

909 N.W.2d 111
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedApril 10, 2018
DocketNo. 20170427
StatusPublished

This text of 909 N.W.2d 111 (Thorstad v. State) 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.

Bluebook
Thorstad v. State, 909 N.W.2d 111 (N.D. 2018).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

[¶ 1] Tanner Thorstad appealed from the district court's order summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief. Thorstad argues the court erred in summarily dismissing his application because he received ineffective assistance of counsel. He claims his attorney failed to properly present his plea agreement to the court and his sentence was harsher than the sentence he agreed to. The district court granted the State's motion to summarily dismiss, concluding Thorstad failed to present competent and admissible evidence to raise an issue of material fact and establish both prongs of the two-prong test for ineffective assistance of counsel from Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 104 S.Ct. 2052, 80 L.Ed.2d 674 (1984). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7). See Leavitt v. State , 2017 ND 173, ¶¶ 7, 16, 898 N.W.2d 435 (holding a post-conviction applicant must present *112competent and admissible evidence on both prongs of the Strickland test to avoid summary dismissal of an ineffective assistance of counsel claim).

[¶ 2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Jerod E. Tufte

Daniel J. Crothers

Lisa Fair McEvers

Jon J. Jensen

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

Related

Strickland v. Washington
466 U.S. 668 (Supreme Court, 1984)
Leavitt v. State
2017 ND 173 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2017)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
909 N.W.2d 111, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thorstad-v-state-nd-2018.