State v. Yoney

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed Travis Yoney’s amended judgment and convictions for attempted murder, burglary, reckless endangerment, and terrorizing. The court held that Yoney waived his challenge to the attempted-murder jury instruction by proposing and agreeing to substantially similar language, rejected his claim of an inconsistent verdict, upheld the terrorizing conviction for sufficient evidence, and found any procedural error in amending the judgment harmless.

Holdings

1. Yoney waived any challenge to the inclusion of "knowingly" in the attempted-murder instruction because he proposed an essentially identical instruction and agreed to the final instruction. He therefore could not obtain reversal based on the alleged instructional error.
2. The verdicts were not inconsistent because the two convictions were based on different alleged conduct: firing into the residence for reckless endangerment and firing at John Doe for attempted murder.
3. The evidence was sufficient to support Yoney's terrorizing conviction because firing a rifle into a house, forcing entry, and pointing the rifle at a resident supported a finding that he threatened an act dangerous to human life with intent to place the resident in fear.
4. Any error in amending the judgment before Yoney's fourteen-day response period expired was harmless and did not require reversal.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the attempted-murder jury instruction improperly permitted conviction for a non-cognizable offense by including the culpability term "knowingly."
2. Whether the jury's verdicts finding Yoney guilty of attempted murder and reckless endangerment were inconsistent and required reversal.
3. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support Yoney's conviction for terrorizing.
4. Whether the district court reversibly erred by amending the judgment before Yoney's fourteen-day period to respond to the State's motion had expired.

Disposition

affirmed