Vining v. Renton (N.D. 2012). · Go Syfert
Search
Vining v. Renton (N.D. 2012). Book View Copy Cite
23 citation events (23 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Ritter v. Ritter (nd, 2016-01-14)
Treatment trajectory · 2012 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
2012 2019 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 3 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Ritter v. Ritter
N.D. · 2016 · signal: see · confidence high
See Vining v. Renton, 2012 ND 86 ; ¶ 17, 816 N.W.2d 63 ; Siewert v. Siewert, 2008 ND 221, ¶ 19 , 758 N.W.2d 691 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." State, County of Cass, Ex Rel. Seibold v. Leverington
N.D. · 2013 · signal: see also · confidence low
See, e.g., Frieze v. Frieze, 2005 ND 53, ¶ 4 , 692 N.W.2d 912 (methods other than a change of residential responsibility should be used initially to attempt to remedy a parent’s misbehavior); see also Vining, 2012 ND 86, ¶ 17 , 816 N.W.2d 63 . [¶ 18] As we noted, the district court here considered the witnesses and reviewed the evidence, and this Court will not reweigh the evidence presented by the parties, nor will we reweigh the credibility of the witnesses.
cited Cited "see, e.g." Krueger v. Tran
N.D. · 2012 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Sweeney v. Sweeney, 2002 ND 206, ¶ 12 , 654 N.W.2d 407 ; see also Vining, 2012 ND 86 , ¶ 23, 816 N.W.2d 63 .
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Vining
v.
Renton
20110233.
North Dakota Supreme Court.
May 3, 2012.
Published

Filed 5/3/12 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2012 ND 83

Carl Aubrey Harmon III, Petitioner and Appellant

v.

State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

No. 20110343

Appeal from the District Court of Williams County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable Gary H. Lee, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Carl A. Harmon III, self-represented, 2521 Circle Drive, Jamestown, ND 58401.  On brief.

Nathan K. Madden, Assistant State’s Attorney, Williams County State’s Attorney Office, P.O. Box 2047, Williston, ND 58802.  On brief.

Harmon v. State

No. 20110343

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Carl Aubrey Harmon III appealed from a district court order summarily dismissing his petition for post-conviction relief.  On appeal, Harmon argues he was entitled to a hearing and his right to due process was violated when the district court summarily dismissed his petition.  We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6) and (7); see Ude v. State , 2009 ND 71, ¶ 12, 764 N.W.2d 419 (stating a petitioner is not entitled to an evidentiary hearing on his  petition for post-conviction relief if he fails to provide any competent evidence to raise an issue of material fact).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom