State v. Williams

2025 ND 46 · North Dakota Supreme Court · February 27, 2025 · No. No. 20240203

Summary

This North Dakota Supreme Court opinion addresses a defendant’s direct appeal following convictions for murder and unlawful possession of a firearm. The court evaluates three primary claims: a Brady violation regarding undisclosed witness interview details, a failure to disclose a state forensic examiner’s employment suspension, and alleged prosecutorial misconduct during closing arguments on DNA evidence. Finding that the defense could have obtained the witness information through reasonable diligence, declining to review an unpreserved issue regarding personnel files, and concluding the prosecutor’s comments were fair inferences from the evidence, the court affirms the district court’s judgment.

Court
North Dakota Supreme Court
Writing for the Court
Crothers, Justice; Jon J. Jensen, C.J.; Lisa Fair McEvers; Jerod E. Tufte; Gail Hagerty, S.J.
Jurisdiction
North Dakota Supreme Court
Decision date
February 27, 2025
Docket number
No. 20240203
Procedural posture
Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District
Standard of review
de novo
Precedential value
published
Parties
Benjamin Isaiah Williams v. State of North Dakota
Disposition
affirmed

Topics

criminal proceduredue processprosecutorial misconductevidenceappellate procedure

Practice areas

criminal procedure

Questions Presented

  1. Whether the district court erred in denying Williams's motion to exclude new witness testimony not disclosed prior to trial under Brady.
  2. Whether the State's failure to disclose Dr. Miller's employment records constituted a Brady or discovery violation warranting reversal.
  3. Whether the State's closing arguments amounted to prosecutorial misconduct violating due process.
  4. Whether an appellate court must address issues not raised in the trial court absent an obvious error.

Holdings

  1. The district court did not err; no Brady violation occurred because Williams could have obtained the information with reasonable diligence.
  2. The court will not address issues not preserved in the trial court unless the alleged error rises to the level of obvious error.
  3. The State's closing arguments did not constitute prosecutorial misconduct; no due process violation occurred.

Key quotations

The United States Supreme Court has held evidence that can be used to impeach a witness is subject to disclosure under Brady. (¶8)
We first determine whether the prosecutor’s actions were misconduct and, if so, we then examine whether the misconduct had prejudicial effect. (¶18)

Factual background

In October 2022 a shooting in Bismarck resulted in the death of Christopher Sebastian. Williams was charged with murder and unlawful possession of a firearm. At trial the State presented forensic evidence and witness testimony; the jury convicted Williams, sentencing him to life without parole and five years concurrent. Williams later alleged Brady violations and prosecutorial misconduct.

Procedural history

Williams was convicted of murder and unlawful possession of a firearm by a jury in the district court. He appealed the denial of his motion to exclude undisclosed witness testimony and raised Brady, discovery, and prosecutorial misconduct claims.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…