State v. Pittenger

North Dakota Supreme Court
State v. Pittenger, 2019 ND 260 (N.D. 2019)
Per Curiam

State v. Pittenger

Opinion

Filed 10/29/2019 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2019 ND 260

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Alexander Justin Pittenger, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20190050

Appeal from the District Court of McHenry County, Northeast Judicial District, the Honorable Michael Patrick Hurly, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam

Joshua E. Frey, State’s Attorney, Towner, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.

William R. Hartl, Rugby, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief. State v. Pittenger No. 20190050

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Alexander Pittenger appeals from a criminal judgment after a jury found him guilty of aggravated assault. Pittenger argues there was insufficient evidence to sustain the jury verdict for his conviction. Pittenger also argues the district court abused its discretion when it permitted the State’s witness to testify about the extent of the victim’s injury. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude sufficient evidence exists that could allow a jury to draw a reasonable inference in favor of conviction. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. Lisa Fair McEvers Daniel J. Crothers Jerod E. Tufte Jon J. Jensen

1

Reference

Status
Published
Syllabus
The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4).