Pelzl v. State

¶1Filed 5/3/12 by Clerk of Supreme Court

¶2IN THE SUPREME COURT

¶3STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

¶4

¶5

¶6

¶72012 ND 85

¶8

¶9

¶10

¶11Daniel S. Pelzl, Petitioner and Appellant

¶12

¶13v.

¶14

¶15State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

¶16

¶17

¶18

¶19No. 20110364

¶20

¶21

¶22

¶23Appeal from the District Court of Richland County, Southeast Judicial District, the Honorable Richard W. Grosz, Judge.

¶24

¶25AFFIRMED.

¶26

¶27Per Curiam.

¶28

¶29Mark T. Blumer, P.O. Box 7340, Fargo, ND 58106, for petitioner and appellant; submitted on brief.

¶30

¶31Ronald W. McBeth, Assistant State’s Attorney, Law Enforcement Center, 413 3rd Avenue North, Wahpeton, ND 58075, for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief.

¶32Pelzl v. State

¶33No. 20110364

¶34

¶35Per Curiam.

¶36[¶1] Daniel Pelzl appeals from a district court judgment summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief.  On appeal, Pelzl argues the district court erred by dismissing his application without holding an evidentiary hearing.  Because Pelzl was put to his proof and did not meet his minimal burden of supporting his application with competent admissible evidence raising an issue of material fact, we summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7).  See, e.g., Ude v. State, 2009 ND 71, ¶ 12, 764 N.W.2d 419 (affirming the summary dismissal of a post-

¶37conviction application when the petitioner was put to his proof and failed to present any competent evidence raising an issue of material fact).

¶38[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

¶39Carol Ronning Kapsner

¶40Mary Muehlen Maring

¶41Daniel J. Crothers

¶42Dale V. Sandstrom