Grzeskowiak v. State

• Decision Date: 26 May 2016
• Docket Number: No. 20150325.,20150325.
• Citation: 879 N.W.2d 461
• Parties: Peter John GRZESKOWIAK, Petitioner and Appellant v. STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee.
• Court: North Dakota Supreme Court

879 N.W.2d 461

Peter John GRZESKOWIAK, Petitioner and Appellant
v.
STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee.

No. 20150325.

Supreme Court of North Dakota.

May 26, 2016.
Rehearing Denied June 30, 2016.

879 N.W.2d 462

Peter J. Grzeskowiak, Minto, N.D., petitioner and appellant; on brief.

Barbara L. Whelan, State's Attorney, Grafton, for respondent and appellee; submitted on brief.

KAPSNER, Justice.

¶ 1] Peter Grzeskowiak appeals from an order summarily denying his application for post-conviction relief. We conclude Grzeskowiak's appellate brief fails to comply with the rules of appellate procedure, and we affirm the order.

I

[¶ 2] In 2013, Grzeskowiak was charged with physical obstruction of a government function and two counts of mistreating animals after investigation of a man being attacked by dogs on a rural road near Grzeskowiak's farm. In October 2013, Grzeskowiak, with court-appointed counsel, pled guilty to one count of mistreating animals and the other two charges against him were dismissed. We summarily affirmed Grzeskowiak's appeal from the denial of his motion for an extension of time to file an appeal from the criminal judgment. State v. Grzeskowiak, 2014 ND 177, 859 N.W.2d 929.

[¶ 3] In 2015, Grzeskowiak filed a self-represented application for post-conviction relief, generally alleging he had been denied his natural right of liberty and due process by fraud, sham proceedings, false charges, wanton disregard for the truth in issuing a broad warrant, denial of bail, false transcripts, and denial of the right to counsel. Grzeskowiak's request for court-appointed counsel was denied with a statement that he failed to submit proof of his earning ability and that his request for counsel would be reconsidered if he submitted proof within five days.

[¶ 4] The district court thereafter summarily denied Grzeskowiak's application for post-conviction relief, stating it did not specify the criminal charge and sentence from which relief was sought, did not set forth a concise statement of each ground for relief, and did not specify the relief requested. The court explained Grzeskowiak failed to substantively state a claim for which relief could be granted and his application was meritless on its face.

II

[¶ 5] Grzeskowiak's appellate brief lists the following “statement of issues”:

1 May a dirty judge preside after 15+ years of judicial terrorism

2 Jurisdiction defects in a perjured search warrant affidavit

3 Jurisdiction bar by denial of counsel

4 My post conviction petition addressing jurisdiction was DENIED in

...