Legal Opinion

Hill v. State

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 20, 2000No. 20000018PublishedCited by 15 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

KAPSNER, Justice.

[¶ 1] The State appealed from a district court’s memorandum opinion and order, entered during post-conviction relief proceedings, granting a new trial to Eric Hill. We hold the district court’s grant of a new trial is appealable. We further hold the district court did not clearly err in finding Hill’s right to be present at a proceeding during deliberations when trial testimony was read to the jury was violated and the violation was not harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. We therefore affirm.

I

[¶2] In February 1998, Hill went on trial for two counts of gross sexual imposition…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Chapman v. CaliforniaSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Brecht v. AbrahamsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1993
  3. James Edward Hegler v. Robert G. Borg, Warden Dan LungrenCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1995
  4. State v. AshNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
  5. State v. SmudaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1988

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by15 opinions

  1. State v. ParisienNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  2. Dominguez v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2013
  3. Wright v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
  4. Broadwell v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
  5. Peltier v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2003

10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API