Lyons v. State , 2021 ND 91 ( 2021 )


Menu:
  •                                                                               FILED
    IN THE OFFICE OF THE
    CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
    MAY 20, 2021
    STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
    IN THE SUPREME COURT
    STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
    
    2021 ND 91
    George Robert Lyons,                                Petitioner and Appellant
    v.
    State of North Dakota,                             Respondent and Appellee
    No. 20200333
    Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central
    Judicial District, the Honorable John A. Thelen, Judge.
    AFFIRMED.
    Per Curiam.
    Benjamin C. Pulkrabek, Mandan, ND, for petitioner and appellant.
    Rachel R. Egstad, Assistant State’s Attorney, Grand Forks, ND, for respondent
    and appellee.
    Lyons v. State
    No. 20200333
    Per Curiam.
    [¶1] George Robert Lyons appeals from an order denying his amended
    application for post-conviction relief. Following a jury trial, Lyons was
    convicted of gross sexual imposition. Lyons applied for post-conviction relief,
    alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, arguing his attorney’s representation
    fell below an objective standard of reasonableness because counsel decided not
    to impeach the victim about a prior, unrelated report of sexual assault.
    Following a hearing, the district court found the attorney’s decision was
    reasonable trial strategy. The court further found the attorney discussed his
    trial strategy with Lyons, who accepted or at least trusted his attorney’s
    decision, and concluded Lyons failed to meet his burden to prove his attorney’s
    assistance was ineffective.
    [¶2] We conclude the district court’s findings are not clearly erroneous. The
    evidence supports the court’s findings on trial strategy and the attorney’s
    communication of trial strategy with Lyons. See Noorlun v. State, 
    2007 ND 118
    , ¶¶ 12-14, 
    736 N.W.2d 477
     (stating we do not second guess trial tactics on
    appeal, including strategic decisions about how to question certain witnesses).
    The court did not err in denying Lyons’ application for post-conviction relief,
    and we summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).
    [¶3]   Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
    Gerald W. VandeWalle
    Daniel J. Crothers
    Lisa Fair McEvers
    Jerod E. Tufte
    1
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 20200333

Citation Numbers: 2021 ND 91

Judges: Per Curiam

Filed Date: 5/20/2021

Precedential Status: Precedential

Modified Date: 5/20/2021