Jerry Verl Holmes, Sr., Petitioner and Appellant
v.
State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
No. 20210284
Appeal from the District Court of Williams County, Northwest Judicial
District, the Honorable Benjamen J. Johnson, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Kiara C. Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, ND, for petitioner and appellant.
Nathan K. Madden, Assistant State’s Attorney, Williston, ND, for respondent
and appellee; submitted on brief.
Holmes v. State
No. 20210284
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Jerry Holmes, Sr. appeals from a district court order denying his
application for post-conviction relief. Holmes argues the court erred in
summarily dismissing his application based on newly discovered evidence. He
contends that a hearing on newly discovered evidence is separate and distinct
from a summary judgment motion hearing and that disputed facts exist in this
case on whether he committed the crime, whether the complaining witness
recanted, and whether the submitted statement supports a claim of newly
discovered evidence. Holmes failed to present competent admissible evidence
that raises a genuine issue of material fact. We summarily affirm under
N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7); Yoney v. State,
(explaining that when the State moves for summary dismissal, an
applicant must present “competent admissible evidence by affidavit or other
comparable means which raises a genuine issue of material fact” to avoid a
summary dismissal).
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Gerald W. VandeWalle
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jerod E. Tufte
1
