Court Opinion

ID: 9386635
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-13 14:04:54.147775+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:07.915520
License: Public Domain

FILED
                                                                      IN THE OFFICE OF THE
                                                                   CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
                                                                          APRIL 13, 2023
                                                                    STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                 IN THE SUPREME COURT
                 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                                2023 ND 70

State of North Dakota,                                Plaintiff and Appellee
  v.
Travis Lee Jacobs,                                 Defendant and Appellant

                               No. 20220280

Appeal from the District Court of Morton County, South Central Judicial
District, the Honorable Douglas A. Bahr, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Kendra M. Richard, Assistant State’s Attorney, Mandan, ND, for plaintiff and
appellee.

William D. Woodworth, Bismarck, ND, for defendant and appellant.
                               State v. Jacobs
                                No. 20220280

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Travis Lee Jacobs appeals from a district court’s criminal judgment
finding him guilty of endangering by fire or explosion and violation of an order
prohibiting contact. Jacobs argues the evidence presented at trial was
insufficient to support the jury’s verdict as to both charges, and the district
court erred by not excusing a prospective juror for cause during voir dire.
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 on both charges. Additionally, the court did not abuse its
discretion by not excusing a prospective juror for cause. The juror in question
provided several assurances he could remain impartial. The court did not err
by relying on those assurances. See State v. Garnder, 2016 ND 161, ¶ 5, 883
N.W.2d 471 (citing State v. Olson, 274 N.W.2d 190, 193 (N.D. 1978)) (holding a
district court should not readily discount the assurances of a juror as to his
impartiality, and the burden rests on the party challenging for cause to
overcome those assurances of impartiality). We summarily affirm under
N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
     Daniel J. Crothers
     Lisa Fair McEvers
     Jerod E. Tufte
     William A. Neumann, S.J.

[¶3] The Honorable William A. Neumann, S.J., sitting in place of Bahr, J.,
disqualified.

                                       1