Opinion
20210351 20210352
04-14-2022
John Clark Bridges, Petitioner and Appellant v. State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
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.
Appeals from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Bruce A. Romanick, Judge.
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.
PER CURIAM.
[¶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).
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W.VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte