State v. Ruddell

20130209 State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Byron Clarence Ruddell, Defendant and Appellant

Appeal from: District Court, Southeast Judicial District, Stutsman County
Judge Thomas E. Merrick
Nature of Action: Misc. Statutory Offense (Felony)
Counsel:
Appellant: Mark Taylor Blumer
Appellee: Frederick Russell Fremgen , State's Attorney
Term: 12/2013   Argument: 12/04/2013  Waived
ND cite: 2013 ND 231
NW cite: 841 N.W.2d 001


Issues: Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
1. Byron Clarence Ruddell's conviction should be reversed because the evidence is insufficient to sustain the guilty verdict.

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
1. Whether there was sufficient evidence to support a finding of guilt.

Add Docket 20130209 RSS Add Docket 20130209 RSS

Docket entries:
107/09/2013 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 07/09/2013
207/09/2013 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 07/09/2013
307/16/2013 Mark T. Blumer appointed as counsel for Ruddell
408/06/2013 ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED August 6, 2013(ENTRY NOS.1-41)
508/20/2013 TRANSCRIPT DATED JUNE 4, 2013, & C.O.S.
608/20/2013 DISK-tra (6/4/13) e-mailed
708/23/2013 AMENDED ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED AUGUST 23, 2013 (ENTRY NOS.1-18 AND 20-41) (NO. 19 - NO DOC)
809/26/2013 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF
909/26/2013 E-FILED MOTION
1009/26/2013 ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 10/04/2013
1110/04/2013 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF
1210/04/2013 E-FILED MOTION
1310/04/2013 ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 10/07/2013
1410/07/2013 APPELLANT BRIEF
1510/07/2013 E-FILED BRIEF
1610/07/2013 APPELLANT APPENDIX
1710/07/2013 E-FILED APPENDIX
1810/09/2013 Rec'd 7 copies of ATB & 6 copies of ATA from Central Duplicating
1910/10/2013 Rec'd $25 e-file surcharge for the ATB (receipt #22269)
2011/06/2013 APPELLEE BRIEF (PDF)
2111/06/2013 E-FILED BRIEF (PDF)
2211/12/2013 Rec'd $25 efile surcharge for AEB (22319)
2311/12/2013 Rec'd 7 copies of AEB from Central Duplicating
2411/20/2013 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT
2511/22/2013 MOTION to Continue Oral Argument and Stipulation
2611/25/2013 request to waive oral agument by appellant
2711/25/2013 E-FILED MOTION
2811/25/2013 REQUEST TO WAIVE ORAL ARGUMENT BY APPELLEE
2911/25/2013 E-FILED MOTION
3011/26/2013 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (APPELLANT'S REQUEST TO WAIVE ORAL ARGUMENT). Granted
3111/26/2013 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (APPELLEE'S REQUEST TO WAIVE ORAL ARGUMENT). Granted
3212/04/2013 APPEARANCES:Waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(f)
3312/04/2013 ARGUED:Waived under N.D.R.App.P. 34(f)
3412/19/2013 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED BY SUMMARY DISP.
3512/19/2013 UNANIMOUS OPINION: Per Curiam,
3601/21/2014 MANDATE
3701/27/2014 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 09/02/2014