State v. Mooney

¶1Filed 1/19/05 by Clerk of Supreme Court

¶2IN THE SUPREME COURT

¶3STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

¶4

¶5

¶6

¶72005 ND 1

¶8

¶9

¶10

¶11Danielle Greybull, Petitioner and Appellant

¶12

¶13v.

¶14

¶15State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

¶16

¶17

¶18

¶19No. 20040254

¶20

¶21

¶22

¶23Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Thomas J. Schneider, Judge.

¶24

¶25AFFIRMED.

¶26

¶27Per Curiam.

¶28

¶29Danielle Greybull (on brief), pro se, 1010 W. 6 th Avenue, Shakopee, MN 55379, petitioner and appellant.

¶30

¶31Cynthia M. Feland (on brief), Assistant State’s Attorney, Courthouse, 514 E. Thayer, Bismarck, ND 58501-4413, for respondent and appellee.

¶32Greybull v. State

¶33No. 20040254

¶34

¶35Per Curiam.

¶36[¶1] Danielle Greybull appeals from the district court’s dismissal of her petition for post-conviction relief.  Greybull argues Blakely v. Washington , 124 S.Ct. 2531 (2004) supports her position that the holding in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000) should be applied retroactively to her case.  The district court dismissed her petition, finding this Court had already addressed this issue in Greybull v. State , 2004 ND 116, 680 N.W.2d 254.

¶37[¶2] We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

¶38[¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

¶39Carol Ronning Kapsner

¶40Dale V. Sandstrom

¶41William A. Neumann

¶42Mary Muehlen Maring