State v. Dahl
Docket Info
- Title
- State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Steven Ronald Dahl, Defendant and Appellant - Case Type
- CRIMINAL APPEAL : DRUGS/CONTRABAND
- Appeal From
-
Case No. 2019-CR-00260
Southeast Judicial District, Barnes County
Jay A. Schmitz
Highlight
When the sufficiency of evidence to support a criminal conviction is challenged, this Court merely reviews the record to determine if there is competent evidence allowing the jury to draw an inference reasonably tending to prove guilt and fairly warranting a conviction.
Constructive possession is proven when the evidence establishes that the accused had the power and capability to exercise dominion and control over the controlled substance or paraphernalia.
When a defendant fails to preserve a claim of insufficient evidence, the Court may review for obvious error, which is a narrow exception to the rule that issues may not be raised for the first time on appeal. Although the Court may decline review of forfeited errors when the appellant fails to argue the obvious error standard, the Court is not foreclosed from considering such errors. An error is obvious when it is a clear deviation from an applicable rule under current law.
Drug paraphernalia used, or possessed with intent to be used, to store a controlled substance does not satisfy the felony use element under N.D.C.C. § 19-03.4-03(1).
If even a properly instructed jury would have had insufficient evidence on which it could have convicted the defendant, the required remedy upon a conclusion there was insufficient evidence presented at trial is to enter a judgment of acquittal.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
Seq. # | Filing Date | Description | Attachment |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 10/05/2021 | NOTICE OF APPEAL : 10/05/2021 | |
2 | 10/05/2021 | ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 10/05/2021 | |
3 | 10/05/2021 | NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV. | |
4 | 10/05/2021 | Notice Served on Scott O. Diamond and Tanya Duffy | |
5 | 10/05/2021 | Notice of Court Appointed Counsel - Scott O. Diamond | |
6 | 11/02/2021 | ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED NOVEMBER 1, 2021 (ENTRY NOS.1-17, 19-85, 91-99, 101-110) | |
7 | 11/02/2021 | (Items Not Electronic - #18 - no doc)(86-90 bulky exhibits)(Del. Event #100 - Duplicate to #99) | |
8 | 12/06/2021 | ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED AUGUST 20, 2020 TO AUGUST 21, 2020 - TRIAL DAY 1 | |
9 | 12/06/2021 | ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED AUGUST 20, 2020 TO AUGUST 21, 2020 - TRIAL DAY 2 | |
10 | 12/06/2021 | TRANSCRIPT CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE | |
11 | 01/11/2022 | APPELLANT BRIEF | View |
12 | 01/11/2022 | APPELLANT APPENDIX | |
13 | 01/13/2022 | Rec'd 3 copies of ATB and ATA back from CD | |
14 | 02/01/2022 | ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JANUARY 31, 2022 (ENTRY NOS. 111-114 ) | |
15 | 02/09/2022 | APPELLEE BRIEF | View |
16 | 02/09/2022 | Rec'd non-substantive corrections to AEB | |
17 | 02/10/2022 | Rec'd 3 copies of AEB back from CD | |
18 | 02/15/2022 | NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT | |
19 | 02/16/2022 | NOTICE OF RESCHEDULED ORAL ARGUMENT SENT | |
20 | 03/23/2022 | 2ND ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MARCH 22, 2022(ENTRY NOS. 115-120) | |
21 | 03/30/2022 | 3RD ELEC. SUPP. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED MARCH 29, 2022 (ENTRY NOS. 121-123) | |
22 | 03/31/2022 | APPEARANCES: Scott O. Diamond/Tanya Duffy | |
23 | 03/31/2022 | ARGUED: Scott O. Diamond/Tanya Duffy | |
24 | 03/31/2022 | ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | |
25 | 12/08/2022 | DISPOSITION (AND REMANDED) | |
26 | 12/08/2022 | UNANIMOUS OPINION : Tufte, Jerod E. | View |
27 | 12/08/2022 | Judgment | View |
28 | 12/30/2022 | MANDATE |