MCGINNIS v. STATE (2023)

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

Neil Adam MCGINNIS, Petitioner and Appellant v. STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

No. 20230119

Decided: November 09, 2023

Leo P. O'Day, Fargo, N.D., for petitioner and appellant; submitted on brief. Robert N. Togni, Assistant State's Attorney, Bismarck, N.D., for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief.

[¶1] Neil McGinnis appeals from a district court order denying his petition for postconviction relief. On appeal, he argues the district court erred when it found that he made no coherent argument as to why a parole officer's testimony was perjured and that his attack on the officer's credibility was made without any admissible supporting evidence. Findings of fact made in a postconviction relief proceeding are subject to the clearly erroneous standard of review. Bridges v. State, 2021 ND 232, ¶ 5, 968 N.W.2d 188. After a full review of the record, we conclude the district court's findings are not clearly erroneous. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Per Curiam.

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Douglas A. Bahr

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network