State of North Dakota v. Steven Donald Aune

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Dakota affirmed Steven Donald Aune’s manslaughter conviction and ten-year sentence. The court held that Aune waived any challenge to allegedly inconsistent jury verdicts by requesting the manslaughter instruction and participating in the verdict forms. The court also found no obvious sentencing error based on consideration of Aune’s criminal history, because the sentence was within the statutory maximum and was not enhanced by prior convictions.

Holdings

1. A defendant may not challenge a possible inconsistency between a manslaughter conviction and a murder acquittal when the defendant invited the alleged error by requesting the manslaughter instruction and participating in the verdict forms.
2. It is not error for a sentencing court to consider prior convictions as part of a defendant's criminal history when the defendant did not object, the convictions were not used to enhance the sentence or impose a mandatory minimum, and there is no showing that the convictions were uncounseled without a valid waiver.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Aune could challenge his manslaughter conviction as inconsistent with the jury's acquittal on murder under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life after he requested the manslaughter instruction and participated in crafting the verdict forms.
2. Whether the district court committed obvious error by considering Aune's prior convictions as part of his criminal history without first determining whether those convictions were uncounseled, where the convictions were not used to enhance his sentence or impose a mandatory minimum.

Disposition

affirmed