State v. Alberts
Citations
- 2019 ND 66
- 924 N.W.2d 96
Syllabus
Issues raised for the first time on appeal will not be considered unless they rise to the level of obvious error. An unambiguous oral sentencing pronouncement will control over an ambiguous written sentence. The district court has discretion in sentencing a criminal defendant, and review of a sentence on appeal is limited to determining whether the district court acted within the limits prescribed by statute or substantially relied on an impermissible factor.
Judges: Vandewalle
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
2 cases in this archive cite this case.
Cites
9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- State v. EnnisNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 1990-12-17· cited 48×
- State v. TresenriterNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2012-11-27· cited 33×
- State v. WardnerNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2006-12-18· cited 32×
- State v. RaulstonNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2005-12-20· cited 30×
- State v. LottNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2019-01-15· cited 17×
- State v. StavigNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2006-03-29· cited 15×
- State v. PeralesNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2012-07-26· cited 6×
- State v. RathNorth Dakota Supreme Court· 2017-08-29· cited 5×
- Bordeaux v. StateSupreme Court of South Carolina· 2014-10-29· cited 3×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.