Barrera v. State

Citation621 N.W.2d 880,2001 ND 18
Decision Date02 February 2001
Docket NumberNo. 20000195.,20000195.
PartiesDavid R. BARRERA, Petitioner and Appellant, v. STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee.
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of North Dakota

Steven Balaban, Bismarck, ND, for petitioner and appellant.

Cynthia Mae Feland, Assistant State's Attorney, Burleigh County Courthouse, Bismarck, ND, for respondent and appellee.

MARING, Justice.

[¶ 1] David Barrera appeals from a trial court's orders, denying his application for post-conviction relief and denying his motion for reconsideration. Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(4)(B), Barrera argues he was denied the opportunity to adequately review his presentence investigation report prior to his sentencing.1 Barrera failed to raise this issue in his previous application for post-conviction relief. We have previously concluded "it is a misuse of process to raise issues on subsequent post-conviction applications that could have been raised in the initial application." Clark v. State, 1999 ND 78, ¶ 19, 593 N.W.2d 329. See also Silvesan v. State, 1999 ND 62, ¶ 9, 591 N.W.2d 131

; State v. Johnson, 1997 ND 235, ¶ 12, 571 N.W.2d 372; McMorrow v. State, 537 N.W.2d 365 (N.D.1995). We affirm the trial court's orders.

[¶ 2] VANDEWALLE, C.J., McCLINTOCK, D.J., NEUMANN, KAPSNER, MARING. JJ., concur.

[¶ 3] The Honorable McCLINTOCK, D.J., sitting in place of SANDSTROM, J., disqualified.

1. "Any disclosure to the defendant of the presentence investigation report ... must occur at least 10 days before sentence is imposed unless this minimum period is waived by the defendant." N.D.R.Crim.P. 32(c)(4)(B). Under this rule, it is clearly the better practice for the trial court to expressly ask the defendant personally to waive the minimum ten-day period in open court, if a defendant has not received his presentence investigation report at least ten days prior to sentencing.

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • Kautzman v. McDonald
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • February 2, 2001
    ... ... Cass County Deputy Sheriff Gregory McDONALD; Cass County Deputy Sheriff Jeff Olson; Cass County, North Dakota; State of North Dakota; North Dakota Highway Patrolman Mitchell Rumple; North Dakota Highway Patrolman Gary Odegard, Defendants and Appellees ... City of ... ...
  • Greybull v. State, 20040040.
    • United States
    • North Dakota Supreme Court
    • June 3, 2004
    ...absent any showing of excuse for failure to timely raise such issues. Steinbach v. State, 2003 ND 46, ¶ 8, 658 N.W.2d 355; Barrera v. State, 2001 ND 18, ¶ 1, 621 N.W.2d 880. Greybull did not raise this issue on her direct appeal nor did she raise it in her previous applications for post-con......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT