STATE v. MCDERMOTT (2025)

[¶1] Travis McDermott appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted him of manslaughter and reckless endangerment with a firearm. On appeal, McDermott argues that the district court committed obvious error by failing to declare a mistrial after some of the jury pool allegedly observed McDermott in restraints prior to voir dire.

[¶2] McDermott waived his claim of error when he raised the issue with the district court but then expressly withdrew any objection, stating that he wished to move forward with trial. McDermott informed his attorney that some of the jury pool had seen him in restraints prior to voir dire; McDermott's attorney raised the issue with the district court, and after discussion on the record, McDermott's attorney informed the court “he has indicated that he is prepared to move forward today despite what happened.” We summarily affirm the judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7). State v. Studhorse, 2024 ND 110, ¶ 25, 7 N.W.3d 253 (explaining that a party waives a claim of error by affirmatively stating he has “no objection” or requests for jury instructions).

Per Curiam.

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