State v. Kruckenberg

MARING, Justice.

[¶ 1] Scott A1 Kruckenberg appeals a criminal judgment entered on a jury verdict finding him guilty of delivery of methamphetamine, third offense. We affirm, concluding the district court’s failure to follow proper statutory procedures for answering questions was not obvious error, the State did not commit prosecutorial misconduct by asking a question related to Kruckenberg’s arrest, and the State did not commit prosecutorial misconduct in its closing argument.

I

[¶ 2] The State charged Scott A1 Kruckenberg with Delivery of Methamphetamine and filed a Notice of Intent to Seek…