STATE v. DARJI (2020)

[¶1] Saha Darji appeals from a criminal judgment after a jury found him guilty of fleeing a peace officer, reckless endangerment, DUI, and refusal to submit to a chemical test. Darji argues he was unconstitutionally convicted of refusal to submit to a chemical test, because the officer read him an implied consent advisory from an unconstitutional statute that was coercive and misleading. Darji did not raise this issue in the district court and we do not address it on appeal. “Issues not adequately raised below will not be addressed on appeal.” State v. Koble, 2000 ND 29, ¶ 5, 606 N.W.2d 521.

[¶2] Darji also argues there was insufficient evidence to convict him of fleeing a peace officer and reckless endangerment. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude substantial evidence exists that could allow a jury to draw a reasonable inference in favor of conviction. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Per Curiam.

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