State v. Romero
North Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
SANDSTROM, Justice.
[¶ 1] Miguel Humberto Medina Romero appeals from criminal judgments entered after a jury convicted him of murder, unlawful possession/manufacture of a controlled substance (marijuana), and unlawful possession of a controlled substance (cocaine) with intent to deliver. We conclude the district court did not err in denying Romero’s motion to allow the jury to view the crime scene, in instructing the jury on self-defense, and in denying Romero’s motion under N.D.R.Crim.P. 29 for a judgment of acquittal on the charge of unlawful possession of cocaine with intent to deliver. We…
2Cases cited31 opinions
- State v. LeidholmNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983
- State v. ErickstadNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
- State v. HavicanSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1990
- State v. EntziNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
- Hoagland v. StateSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by16 opinions
- State v. White BirdNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. FrieszNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2017
- State v. EgglestonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2020
- State v. MontplaisirNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. BrossartNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2015
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.