CASTER v. STATE (2020)

[¶1] Lekemia D'Andre Caster appealed from a district court order summarily denying his application for post-conviction relief. In his application for post-conviction relief, Caster alleges the existence of newly discovered evidence and he received an unlawful sentence. Because the district court's order did not explain its reasoning, and the record did not provide any insight into the court's reasoning, we were unable to determine whether the court erred in denying Caster's application for post-conviction relief. We retained jurisdiction under N.D.R.App.P. 35(a)(3) and remanded with instructions that the district court explain its reasoning, hold an evidentiary hearing if necessary, and make sufficient findings of fact on Caster's amended application for post-conviction relief. Caster v. State, 2019 ND 187, 931 N.W.2d 223.

[¶2] An evidentiary hearing was scheduled on September 3, 2019. The parties concurred that no further evidence was necessary and legal argument would suffice. On November 7, 2019, the district court issued an order containing findings of fact and summarily dismissing Caster's application. After reviewing the district court's findings of fact, we summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6).

Per Curiam.

[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Jerod E. Tufte Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers