State v. Boespflug
|
| 20100121 |
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Joshua Michael Boespflug, Defendant and Appellant
|
| Appeal from: |
District Court,
Northwest Judicial District,
Ward County
Judge Gary H. Lee |
|
Nature of Action: |
Misc. Statutory Off. (Misdemeanor)
|
| Counsel: |
|
| Term: |
11/2010 Argument: 11/30/2010 04:00pm
|
| ND cite: |
2011 ND 30
|
| NW cite: |
793 N.W.2d 774
|
|
|
| Issues: |
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
Issue One:The court erred in denying the Judgment of Acquittal because the evidence was insufficient to sustain a conviction.
Issue Two:The trial court erred when it refused to give Boespflug's requested jury instruction on the affirmative defense.
Issue Three:The trial court erred when it denied Boespflug's Motion for Arrest of Judgment.
Issue Four:The court erred in denying Boespflug's Motion for New Trial.
Issue Five:The trial court erroneously instructed the jury on the essential elements of the felony version of Corruption of Minor, rather than the misdemeanor version.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
Issue One: The trial court did not err in denying the defendant's motion for judgment of acquittal because the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.
Issue Two: The trial court did not err when it refused to give requested jury instruction on a claimed affirmative defense that the defendant on grounds that he did not believe the victim to be a minor was therefore not criminally responsible for his
actions.
Issue Three: The trial court did not err when it denied the defendant's motion for arrest of judgment because the criminal complaint adequately charged the offense of Corruption or Solicitation of a Minor and the trial court had jurisdiction to hear
the matter, the offense having been committed in Ward County.
Issue Four: The court did not err in denying the defendant's motion for new trial because the verdict was not against the weight of the evidence.
Issue Five: The court's instructions to the jury were not erroneous and embraced a fair and impartial exposition of the law applicable to the evidence and facts of the case.
|
|
 Add Docket 20100121 RSS
|
| 1 | | 04/27/2010 | |
NOTICE OF APPEAL: 04/23/2010 |
| 2 | | 04/27/2010 | |
ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 04/23/2010 |
| 3 | | 06/10/2010 | |
TRANSCRIPTS DATED 3/9/09, 5/22/09, 11/20/09, 11/25/09, 1/14/10, 4/21/10 & C.O.S. |
| 4 | | 06/10/2010 | |
DISK-TRA (3/9/09, 5/22/09, 11/20/09, 11/25/09, 1/14/10 & 4/21/10) |
| 5 | | 06/10/2010 | |
TRANSCRIPT DATED NOVEMBER 25, 2009 (JURY TRIAL). |
| 6 | | 06/14/2010 | |
RECORD ON APPEAL (2 volumes) & separates, which include exhibits |
| 7 | | 06/16/2010 | |
DISK-TRA (11/25/09 JURY TRIAL) E-MAILED |
| 8 | | 06/21/2010 | |
MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF |
| 9 | | 06/21/2010 | |
E-FILED MOTION |
| 10 | | 06/21/2010 | |
NO ACTION TAKEN |
| 11 | | 07/21/2010 | |
Received $25 e-filing surcharge for ATB (Receipt #19729). |
| 12 | | 07/23/2010 | |
S.Ct. Not. of Dismissal/Failure to Proceed |
| 13 | | 07/28/2010 | |
Reply to Dismissal. |
| 14 | | 07/28/2010 | |
NO ACTION TAKEN (S.Ct. Not. of Dismissal/Failure to Proceed) |
| 15 | | 07/28/2010 | |
MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (sua sponte) |
| 16 | | 07/28/2010 | |
ACTION BY CLERK (MAT) sua sponte. Granted: 07/28/2010 |
| 17 | | 07/28/2010 | |
APPELLANT BRIEF (e-filed) |
| 18 | | 07/28/2010 | |
E-FILED BRIEF (ATB) |
| 19 | | 07/28/2010 | |
APPELLANT APPENDIX (e-filed) PDF |
| 20 | | 07/28/2010 | |
E-FILED APPENDIX (ATA) |
| 21 | | 07/29/2010 | |
Received 7 copies of ATB from Central Duplicating. |
| 22 | | 07/29/2010 | |
Received 6 copies of ATA from Central Duplicating. |
| 23 | | 08/20/2010 | |
MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF (E-filed) |
| 24 | | 08/20/2010 | |
E-FILED MOTION (MAE) |
| 25 | | 08/20/2010 | |
ACTION BY CLERK (MAE). Granted: 09/27/2010 |
| 26 | | 09/22/2010 | |
APPELLEE BRIEF |
| 27 | | 09/22/2010 | |
APPELLEE APPENDIX |
| 28 | | 09/30/2010 | |
Received 8 red covers for AEB |
| 29 | | 10/04/2010 | |
Received 8 cc each of TOA & corrected pgs. 9 & 10 for AEB |
| 30 | | 10/04/2010 | |
DISK of AEB (CD) |
| 31 | | 10/18/2010 | |
NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT |
| 32 | | 11/10/2010 | |
Request for waiver of oral argument on behalf of appellee |
| 33 | | 11/12/2010 | |
Request for waiver of oral argument on behalf of Appellant |
| 34 | | 11/12/2010 | |
E-FILED MOTION (waiver on behalf of appellant) |
| 35 | | 11/12/2010 | |
ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (waiver on behalf of appellee). Granted |
| 36 | | 11/12/2010 | |
ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (waiver of behalf of appellant) |
| 37 | | 11/30/2010 | |
APPEARANCES: Waived under N.D.R.App.34(f) |
| 38 | | 11/30/2010 | |
ARGUED: Waived under N.D.R.App.34(f) |
| 39 | | 02/08/2011 | |
DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED |
| 40 | | 02/08/2011 | |
UNANIMOUS OPINION: VandeWalle, Gerald W. |
| 41 | | 02/09/2011 | |
Judgment Sent to Parties |
| 42 | | 03/02/2011 | |
MANDATE |
| 43 | | 03/04/2011 | |
RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE |