STATE v. HAMILTON (2025)

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Adam Scott HAMILTON, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20250307

Decided: December 18, 2025

Sarah W. Gereszek, Assistant State's Attorney, Grand Forks, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief. Jamie L. Schaible, Fargo, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.

[¶1] Adam Hamilton appeals from an order of the district court granting the State's motion to remove a condition from Hamilton's criminal judgment that had required money from his prison account to be applied to his child support obligations. The State brought the motion after learning all of Hamilton's children were over eighteen years old and had finished high school. The State asserts the motion was brought pursuant to N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(a)(2). We review orders amending a criminal judgment pursuant to Rule 35(a)(2) for an abuse of discretion. State v. Comes, 2019 ND 99, ¶¶ 4, 8, 926 N.W.2d 117. After reviewing the record, we conclude the court did not abuse its discretion by granting the motion and summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

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Out of date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