Title: State v. Pittenger

State: north-dakota

Issuer: North Dakota Supreme Court

Document:

2019 ND ____ State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Alexander Justin Pittenger, Defendant and Appellant No. 20190050 Appeal from the District Court of McHenry County, Northeast Judicial District, the Honorable Michael Patrick Hurly, Judge. AFFIRMED. Per Curiam Joshua E. Frey, State’s Attorney, Towner, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief. William R. Hartl, Rugby, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief. 1 Per Curiam. Alexander Pittenger appeals from a criminal judgment after a jury found him guilty of aggravated assault. Pittenger argues there was insufficient evidence to sustain the jury verdict for his conviction. Pittenger also argues the district court abused its discretion when it permitted the State’s witness to testify about the extent of the victim’s injury. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude sufficient evidence exists that could allow a jury to draw a reasonable inference in favor of conviction. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). State v. Pittenger No. 20190050 Per Curiam. [¶1] Alexander Pittenger appeals from a criminal judgment after a jury found him guilty of aggravated assault. Pittenger argues there was insufficient evidence to sustain the jury verdict for his conviction. Pittenger also argues the district court abused its discretion when it permitted the State’s witness to testify about the extent of the victim’s injury. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we conclude sufficient evidence exists that could allow a jury to draw a reasonable inference in favor of conviction. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). [¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. Lisa Fair McEvers Daniel J. Crothers Jerod E. Tufte Jon J. Jensen