State v. Zottnick

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed Ryan Zottnick’s conviction for violating an order prohibiting contact. The court held that the evidence did not support a requested jury instruction on excuse and was sufficient to establish that Zottnick willfully violated the order.

Holdings

1. A defendant is entitled to an excuse instruction only when evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the defendant, supports a claim that the conduct was believed necessary and appropriate for a purpose that would establish a justification or excuse recognized under N.D.C.C. chapter 12.1-05. Zottnick's evidence that Abt initiated contact and that he wanted to preserve their relationship did not satisfy that requirement, so the district court properly refused the instruction.
2. The evidence was sufficient to support Zottnick's conviction because competent evidence allowed the jury to reasonably find that he knowingly had prohibited direct contact with Abt after receiving notice of the order.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred by refusing to instruct the jury on the defense of excuse under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-05-08.
2. Whether competent evidence was sufficient to support Zottnick's conviction for violating the order prohibiting contact.

Disposition

affirmed