Davis v. State

¶1Filed 11/21/13 by Clerk of Supreme Court

¶2IN THE SUPREME COURT

¶3STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

¶4

¶5

¶6

¶72013 ND 201

¶8

¶9

¶10

¶11Timothy Terrill Davis, Petitioner and Appellant

¶12

¶13v.

¶14

¶15State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

¶16

¶17

¶18

¶19No. 20130073

¶20

¶21

¶22

¶23Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable John C. Irby, Judge.

¶24

¶25AFFIRMED.

¶26

¶27Per Curiam.

¶28

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

¶30

¶31Ryan J. Younggren, State’s Attorney, P.O. Box 2806, Fargo, N.D. 58108-

¶322806, for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief.

¶33Davis v. State

¶34No. 20130073

¶35

¶36Per Curiam.

¶37[¶1] Timothy Terrill Davis appeals from a district court judgment summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief without an evidentiary hearing.  In June 2012, Davis pled guilty to theft of property, a class C felony, and to contributing to the deprivation of a minor, a class A misdemeanor.  Davis argues the district court erred in summarily dismissing his post-conviction relief application because he received ineffective assistance of counsel and his trial counsel’s alleged deficient performance prejudiced his defense.  We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7).   See Murchison v. State , 2011 ND 126, ¶ 8, 799 N.W.2d 360 (“To establish a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel a defendant ‘has a heavy burden of proving . . . the defendant was prejudiced by counsel’s deficient performance.’” (citation omitted)); Smestad v. State , 2011 ND 163, ¶ 11, 801 N.W.2d 691 (“If it is easier to dispose of an ineffectiveness claim on the ground of lack of sufficient prejudice, which we expect will often be so, that course should be followed.”  (citation omitted)).

¶38[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

¶39Daniel J. Crothers

¶40Mary Muehlen Maring

¶41Carol Ronning Kapsner

¶42Dale V. Sandstrom