Winarske v. State
This text of 2014 ND 117 (Winarske 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.
Opinion
Filed 6/24/14 by Clerk of Supreme Court
IN THE SUPREME COURT
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2014 ND 117
Adam Joseph Winarske, Petitioner and Appellant
v.
State of North Dakota , Respondent and Appellee
No. 20130390
Appeal from the District Court of Morton County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable David E. Reich, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Erin M. Conroy (on brief), 416 Sinclair Street, P.O. Box 137, Bottineau, N.D. 58318, and Nicholas D. Thornton (on brief), 3003 32nd Avenue South, Suite 240, P.O. Box 3143, Fargo, N.D. 58108-3143, for petitioner and appellant.
Allen M. Koppy (on brief), Morton County State’s Attorney, 210 Second Avenue NW, Mandan, N.D. 58554, for respondent and appellee.
Winarske v. State
[¶1] Adam Winarske appeals from a district court order denying his application for post-conviction relief. Winarske argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney failed to object to the presentation of certain testimony and failed to cross-examine a witness. He also argues his counsel was ineffective because his attorney allegedly failed to appropriately research and calculate his credit for time served. The district court found there is no evidence in this case to support Winarske’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Dale V. Sandstrom
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
2014 ND 117, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winarske-v-state-nd-2014.