BRIDGES v. STATE (2022)

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

John Clark BRIDGES, Petitioner and Appellant v. STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

Nos. 20210351 & 20210352

Decided: April 14, 2022

Kiara C. Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, N.D., for petitioner and appellant; submitted on brief. Tessa M. Vaagen, Assistant State's Attorney, Bismarck, N.D., for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief.

[¶1] John Bridges appeals from district court orders summarily dismissing his applications for postconviction relief as untimely and for lack of a genuine issue of material fact. Bridges argues he was entitled to an evidentiary hearing because there were genuine issues of material fact regarding his claims of newly discovered evidence. We conclude that Bridges’ applications for postconviction relief were not filed within the two-year statute of limitations under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(2). We further conclude he has failed to raise a genuine issue of material fact of newly discovered evidence, which if proved and reviewed in light of the evidence as a whole, would establish that he did not engage in the criminal conduct for which he was convicted. See N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(3)(a)(1); Johnson v. State, 2015 ND 7, ¶ 7, 858 N.W.2d 632. Accordingly, we summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7).

Per Curiam.

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

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Out of date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