WASLASKI v. STATE, 2012 ND 232 (2012)
Court: Supreme Court of North Dakota
Number: inndco20121127553
Visitors: 7
Filed: Nov. 27, 2012
Latest Update: Nov. 27, 2012
Summary: PER CURIAM. [ 1] Edward Waslaski, Jr., appealed from a trial court order summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Waslaski argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel and the trial court failed to advise him of his rights under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b). [ 2] We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7); see Ude v. State, 2009 ND 71, 12, 764 N.W.2d 419 (stating a petitioner is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his application for post-conv
Summary: PER CURIAM. [ 1] Edward Waslaski, Jr., appealed from a trial court order summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Waslaski argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel and the trial court failed to advise him of his rights under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b). [ 2] We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7); see Ude v. State, 2009 ND 71, 12, 764 N.W.2d 419 (stating a petitioner is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his application for post-convi..
More
PER CURIAM.
[¶1] Edward Waslaski, Jr., appealed from a trial court order summarily dismissing his application for post-conviction relief. On appeal, Waslaski argues he received ineffective assistance of counsel and the trial court failed to advise him of his rights under N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(b).
[¶2] We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7); see Ude v. State, 2009 ND 71, ¶ 12, 764 N.W.2d 419 (stating a petitioner is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his application for post-conviction relief if he fails to provide any competent evidence to raise a genuine issue of material fact).
[¶3] Gerald W. VandeWALLE, C.J.
Mary Muehlen Maring
Daniel J. Crothers
Dale V. Sandstrom
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Source: Leagle
