Wickham v. State
Docket Info
- Title
- Corey Wickham, Petitioner and Appellee
v.
State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellant - Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : POST-CONVICTION RELIEF
- Appeal From
-
Case No. 2020-CV-02968
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
Bobbi Brown Weiler
Highlight
A comment on a defendant’s post-arrest silence is an improper comment on the right to remain silent in violation of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution.
In considering whether counsel’s failure to object to a Doyle violation establishes a reasonable probability that, but for counsel’s errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different in the postconviction relief context, the district court must consider the factors outlined in State v. Wilder, 2018 ND 93, ¶ 9, 909 N.W.2d 684. They include: (1) the use to which the prosecution puts the post arrest silence; (2) who elected to pursue the line of questioning; (3) the quantum of other evidence indicative of guilt; (4) the intensity and frequency of the reference; and (5) the availability to the trial judge of an opportunity to grant a motion for mistrial or to give curative instructions.
A witness’s isolated reference to a defendant’s invocation of his right to counsel, without further elaboration or further mention by the State at any other time during the trial or in closing arguments, does not warrant a new trial for the defendant.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
Seq. # | Filing Date | Description | Attachment |
---|---|---|---|
1 | 11/09/2021 | NOTICE OF APPEAL : 11/09/2021 | |
2 | 11/09/2021 | ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 11/16/2021 | |
3 | 11/10/2021 | ANNOUNCED DISQUALIFICATION : VandeWalle, Gerald W. | |
4 | 11/10/2021 | NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV. | |
5 | 11/10/2021 | Notice served on Joshua A. Amundson, David L. Rappenecker, & Lloyd C. Suhr | |
6 | 12/07/2021 | ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED DECEMBER 7, 2021 (ENTRY NOS.1-24 & 27-47) (NOT SENT NOS. 10-CD) | |
7 | 12/09/2021 | ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED DECEMBER 7, 2021 (ENTRY NOS.1-244) (NOT SENT NOS. 117, 121 | |
8 | 12/09/2021 | &112) (UNDERLYING) | |
9 | 01/13/2022 | ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED JULY 7, 2021 | |
10 | 01/13/2022 | TRANSCRIPT C.O.S. | |
11 | 01/18/2022 | Rec'd amended Transcript C.O.S. | |
12 | 02/23/2022 | APPELLANT BRIEF | View |
13 | 02/23/2022 | Oral Argument Request by Appellant | |
14 | 02/25/2022 | Rec'd 3 copies of ATB from CSD (no ATA) | |
15 | 03/22/2022 | APPELLEE BRIEF | View |
16 | 03/22/2022 | Oral Argument Request by Appellee | |
17 | 03/24/2022 | NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT | |
18 | 03/24/2022 | SITTING WITH THE COURT : Haskell, Bruce B. | |
19 | 03/24/2022 | Rec'd 3 copies of the AEB from CSD | |
20 | 04/28/2022 | APPEARANCES: Joshua A. Amundson & David L. Rappenecker/Lloyd C. Suhr | |
21 | 04/28/2022 | ARGUED: David L. Rappenecker/Lloyd C. Suhr | |
22 | 04/28/2022 | ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST | |
23 | 05/26/2022 | DISPOSITION | |
24 | 05/26/2022 | UNANIMOUS OPINION : Tufte, Jerod E. | View |
25 | 05/26/2022 | Judgment | View |
26 | 06/17/2022 | MANDATE |