STATE v. RUNNING BEAR (2025)

[¶1] Reuben Dale Running Bear appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted him of child abuse of a victim under six years of age, a class B felony. Running Bear argues there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction.

[¶2] “In reviewing challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence on appeal, the defendant bears the burden of showing the evidence reveals no reasonable inference of guilt when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict.” State v. Grant, 2023 ND 62, ¶ 18, 988 N.W.2d 563 (cleaned up).

[¶3] Based on our review of the record, we conclude there was sufficient evidence to support the guilty verdict. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Per Curiam.

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