Tamba v. State, 918 N.W.2d 64 (N.D. 2018). · Go Syfert
Search
Tamba v. State, 918 N.W.2d 64 (N.D. 2018). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
10 citation events (10 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: State v. Hoehn (nd, 2019-08-22)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State v. Hoehn
N.D. · 2019 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Vandehoven , 2009 ND 165 , 772 N.W.2d 603 (reversed and remanded because the district court failed to comply with Rule 11 in several ways, including failure to inform the defendant of the maximum possible penalty); State v. Boushee , 459 N.W.2d 552 , 555-56 (N.D. 1990) (reversed and remanded where the district court failed to inform defendant of the minimum or maximum penalties until after accepting the plea); see also Wallace , 2018 ND 225 , ¶ 10, 918 N.W.2d 64 (reversed and remanded where the record failed to show defendant was informed of mandatory minimum); State v. Farrell , 2000 ND …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Richard Saa TAMBA, Petitioner and Appellant
v.
STATE of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
20180046.
North Dakota Supreme Court.
Oct 3, 2018.
918 N.W.2d 64
Samuel A. Gereszek, East Grand Forks, MN, for petitioner and appellant., Nicholas S. Samuelson (argued), third-year law student, appearing under the rule on the limited practice of law by law students, and Kara S. Olson (appeared), Assistant State's Attorney, Fargo, ND, for respondent and appellee.
Per Curiam.
Published
Per Curiam.

[¶ 1] Richard Tamba appealed a district court order denying his application for post-conviction relief. Tamba argues the district court erred in finding Tamba failed to establish he was prejudiced by his trial counsel's deficient representation. At oral argument, Tamba raised issues regarding the proper interpretation of Padilla v. Kentucky , 559 U.S. 356 , 372, 130 S.Ct. 1473 , 176 L.Ed.2d 284 (2010). This issue was not raised in the briefs, so we do not consider it. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). Bahtiraj v. State , 2013 ND 240 , ¶ 17, 840 N.W.2d 605 (in an immigration case, discussing factors to be considered by the district court in determining whether a defendant would have decided not to plead guilty and insisted instead on going to trial).

[¶ 2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Jon J. Jensen

Lisa Fair McEvers

Daniel J. Crothers

Jerod E. Tufte