Summary
The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed the denial of Christopher M. Cue’s motion for post-conviction relief concerning credit for time served. The court held that the district court’s order, entered after an evidentiary hearing, sufficiently indicated the basis for its decision and did not require remand under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-11. The court also held that Cue failed to establish by the record that he was entitled to additional sentence credit under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-02(2).
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the district court's order denying post-conviction relief sufficiently stated findings and conclusions under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-11 or required a remand.
- Whether Cue established that he was entitled to additional credit for time spent in custody under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-02(2).
Holdings
- A remand was not required because the district court's order, issued shortly after an evidentiary hearing, sufficiently reflected a finding that the credit for time served had been correctly computed and that relief was denied after the hearing.
- Cue was not entitled to additional sentence credit because he failed to affirmatively establish by the record that additional credit was due, and the district court's finding that the credit had been correctly computed was not clearly erroneous.
Key quotations
“A finding is clearly erroneous if it is induced by an erroneous view of the law, if it is not supported by any evidence, or if, although there is some evidence to support it, a reviewing court is left with a definite and firm conviction a mistake has been made.” (¶ 10)
“We conclude Cue has not affirmatively established by the record that he is entitled to additional credit for time served in this case, and the record does not demonstrate that the district court's finding was clearly erroneous.” (¶ 17)
Factual background
Cue pleaded guilty to simple assault of a peace officer and received a sentence with most of the imprisonment suspended and supervised probation imposed. After repeated probation violations, including failure to participate meaningfully in treatment at the Tompkins Rehabilitation and Corrections Unit, the district court revoked probation and sentenced Cue to two years' imprisonment while awarding 103 days of credit, later amended to 108 days. Cue claimed that he was entitled to substantially more credit, but the records and his testimony were inconsistent regarding the time attributable to this case.
Procedural history
Cue pleaded guilty to simple assault of a peace officer and subsequently violated probation conditions, including failure to meaningfully participate in treatment. After the district court revoked probation and awarded 108 days of credit for time served, Cue filed several motions seeking additional credit. He then sought post-conviction relief, alleging that he was entitled to credit for 161 days of incarceration. Following an evidentiary hearing, the district court found that the State had correctly computed the credit and denied relief. The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed.