Summary
The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed MyKennah Lott’s conviction for preventing arrest, concluding that sufficient evidence supported the verdict. The court vacated her sentence and remanded for resentencing because the district court failed to personally address her and provide an opportunity for allocution under N.D.R.Crim.P. 32. The court held that this unpreserved error constituted obvious error affecting substantial rights.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether sufficient evidence supported Lott's conviction for preventing arrest.
- Whether the district court committed obvious error by imposing sentence without personally determining whether Lott wished to make a statement or present mitigating information.
- Whether the failure to provide an opportunity for allocution affected Lott's substantial rights and required resentencing.
Holdings
- The evidence was sufficient to support Lott's guilty verdict for preventing arrest.
- N.D.R.Crim.P. 32 requires the sentencing court to personally determine whether the defendant wishes to make a statement on the defendant's own behalf or present mitigating information; allowing defense counsel to speak does not satisfy that requirement.
- An individual denied the right of allocution has generally met the burden of showing that the error affected substantial rights, unless the defendant could not potentially receive a lower sentence.
Key quotations
“While it is unclear whether Beckman would have taken the opportunity to speak, Rule 32, N.D.R.Crim.P., at the very least mandates she be given an opportunity.” (¶ 5)
“Rule 32, N.D.R.Crim.P., mandates Lott be given an opportunity to speak on her behalf before sentencing.” (¶ 12)
Factual background
In January 2017, Lott and an acquaintance were found walking on property owned by the Dakota Access Pipeline. After law enforcement approached and informed Lott that she was under arrest for trespassing, she resisted, broke free, and had to be taken to the ground. Following a bench trial, she was convicted of preventing arrest; during sentencing, the court addressed counsel but did not personally address Lott regarding her right to speak.
Procedural history
Lott was convicted of preventing arrest under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-02 following a bench trial in the Morton County District Court. At sentencing, the court addressed defense counsel, who conferred with Lott and requested waiver of fines and fees, but the record did not show that the court personally asked Lott whether she wished to make a statement. The North Dakota Supreme Court summarily affirmed the conviction, vacated the sentence, and remanded for resentencing.
Remand instructions
The district court must vacate the original sentence and resentence Lott in a proceeding that gives her a personal opportunity to make a statement on her own behalf and present mitigating information, consistent with N.D.R.Crim.P. 32.