From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

State v. Curtiss

Supreme Court of North Dakota
Sep 15, 2011
2011 N.D. 175 (N.D. 2011)

Opinion

No. 20110062.

Decided September 15, 2011.

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable David E. Reich, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Pamela A. Nesvig (on brief), Assistant State's Attorney, and Katherine M. Naumann (on brief), third-year law student, appearing under the Rule on the Limited Practice of Law by Law Students, Courthouse, P.O. Box 5518, Bismarck, N.D. 58506-5518, for plaintiff and appellee.

Kent M. Morrow (on brief), 411 North 4th Street, P.O. Box 2155, Bismarck, N.D. 58502-2155, for defendant and appellant.


Per Curiam.


[¶ 1] Spencer Curtiss appeals the district court's criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted him of gross sexual imposition. Curtiss argues the district court erred by admitting a video of Curtiss smoking marijuana, admitting testimony about Curtiss channeling a younger personality while he engaged in sexual acts with the victim and excluding evidence of the victim's sexual history. We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4), concluding the district court did not abuse its discretion by making the evidentiary rulings.

[¶ 2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Mary Muehlen Maring

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Dale V. Sandstrom


Summaries of

State v. Curtiss

Supreme Court of North Dakota
Sep 15, 2011
2011 N.D. 175 (N.D. 2011)
Case details for

State v. Curtiss

Case Details

Full title:State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Spencer Curtiss…

Court:Supreme Court of North Dakota

Date published: Sep 15, 2011

Citations

2011 N.D. 175 (N.D. 2011)
803 N.W.2d 834

Citing Cases

Curtiss v. State

The jury found Curtiss guilty. Curtiss appealed, arguing the evidence was insufficient to support his…

Curtiss v. State

[¶ 1] Spencer Curtiss appealed from a district court order summarily dismissing his second application for…