Summary
This North Dakota Supreme Court per curiam opinion affirms a criminal conviction for gross sexual imposition following an appeal challenging juror excusal and jury instructions. The court determined that the defendant forfeited his objection to the district court's jury selection procedures by failing to object to the alternate juror, thereby limiting appellate review to obvious error, which he failed to establish. Furthermore, the court found that his failure to object to the jury instructions at trial waived the issue on appeal. Accordingly, the criminal judgment was affirmed.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court's failure to follow Rule 24 in excusing a juror and impaneling an alternate, and the appellant's failure to preserve the issue, warrants reversal.
- Whether the failure to object to the jury instructions waived the issue and requires affirmation of the judgment.
Holdings
- The issue was not preserved; the error is waived and no obvious error was shown, so the judgment is affirmed.
- The failure to object to the jury instructions constitutes a waiver, and the judgment is affirmed.
Key quotations
“Alg failed to properly preserve the issue for appeal and did not brief the issue as an obvious error to this Court.” (¶ 3)
“A defendant’s decision to not object to a jury instruction when given the opportunity constitutes a waiver of the right to argue on appeal that the instruction was erroneous.” (¶ 4)
Factual background
Jeffrey Alg was convicted by a jury of gross sexual imposition. The trial court excused a juror and impaneled an alternate after deliberations began, and gave jury instructions that allegedly omitted specific conduct elements and unanimity requirements.
Procedural history
The district court entered a criminal judgment after a jury verdict finding the defendant guilty of gross sexual imposition. The defendant appealed, arguing errors in juror excusal under Rule 24 and improper jury instructions, but failed to preserve those issues for appellate review.