STATE v. GRAMKOW (2025)

[¶1] Shawn Allen Gramkow appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted him of manslaughter and reckless endangerment. On appeal, Gramkow argues insufficient evidence supports his convictions because the evidence shows he acted in self-defense. The jury was instructed on self-defense, limits on the use of excessive or deadly force, and the reasonableness of the accused's belief to be determined from defendant's viewpoint. “When considering insufficiency of the evidence, we will not reweigh conflicting evidence or judge the credibility of witnesses.” State v. Friesz, 2017 ND 177, ¶ 34, 898 N.W.2d 688 (citation omitted). “A trier of fact may find a defendant guilty even though evidence exists which, if believed, could lead to a verdict of not guilty.” Id. (cleaned up). After review of the record, we conclude competent evidence exists allowing a jury to draw an inference Gramkow had not acted in self-defense or had exceeded the limits on use of deadly force. See, e.g., Friesz, ¶ 40 (explaining “conflicting evidence exists regarding whether he ‘in good faith honestly believed and had reasonable grounds to believe’ his conduct was necessary”). Sufficient evidence supports the convictions. We summarily affirm the criminal judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Per Curiam.

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