Tresenriter v. State
Opinion
Filed 4/22/15 by Clerk of Supreme Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2015 ND 88
Michael J. Tresenriter, Petitioner and Appellant
v.
State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
No. 20140359
Appeal from the District Court of Wells County, Southeast Judicial District, the Honorable James D. Hovey, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Scott O. Diamond, 210 Broadway, Ste. 401B, Fargo, ND 58102, for petitioner and appellant.
Kathleen K. Murray, State’s Attorney, 700 Railway St. N. #325, Fessenden, ND 58438, for respondent and appellee.
Tresenriter v. State
No. 20140359
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Michael J. Tresenriter appeals from a district court judgment dismissing his application for post-conviction relief. He argues the district court erred in summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief, without holding an evidentiary hearing, because he did not receive notice of the summary dismissal. While the State did not use the term “summary disposition” in its motion to dismiss, the brief in support of Tresenriter’s application for post-conviction relief filed by his attorney in the district court specifically indicated “[t]he State is requesting that the court summarily dismiss. . . .” We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7). See Delvo v. State , 2010 ND 78, ¶ 13, 782 N.W.2d 72 (holding an applicant was put on notice the State was putting her to her proof when the State requested summary disposition in its response to the post-conviction relief application).
[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Lisa Fair McEvers
Daniel J. Crothers
Dale V. Sandstrom
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2015 ND 88 (Tresenriter v. State) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.