¶1Filed 7/13/11 by Clerk of Supreme Court
¶2IN THE SUPREME COURT
¶3STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
¶11State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
¶13v.
¶15John Karl Ennen, Defendant and Appellant
¶19No. 20110003
¶23Appeal from the District Court of Morton County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Robert O. Wefald, Judge.
¶25AFFIRMED.
¶27Per Curiam.
¶29Jackson John Lofgren, Assistant State’s Attorney, Morton County Courthouse, 210 2nd Avenue Northwest, Mandan, N.D. 58554, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
¶31Kent M. Morrow, P.O. Box 2155, Bismarck, N.D. 58502-2155, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.
¶33No. 20110003
¶35Per Curiam.
¶36[¶1] John Ennen appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of surreptitious intrusion, a class C felony, under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-12.2. On appeal, Ennen argues the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction and the district court committed reversible error when it responded to the jury’s request for a ruler outside of his presence. We conclude sufficient evidence exists to support the verdict. On this record, we conclude the court’s decision to comply with the jury’s request for a ruler was harmless error. See State v. Hatch , 346 N.W.2d 268, 278 (N.D. 1984) (violation of defendant’s right to be present during communication between the judge and the jury after the case has been submitted to the jury may be harmless error). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).
¶37[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
¶38Carol Ronning Kapsner
¶39Mary Muehlen Maring
¶40Daniel J. Crothers
¶41Dale V. Sandstrom