Krogstad v. State , 2023 ND 30 ( 2023 )

FILED
IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
FEBRUARY 16, 2023
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2023 ND 30Jeffrey Scott Krogstad, Petitioner and Appellant
v.
State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
No. 20220264
Appeal from the District Court of Grand Forks County, Northeast Central
Judicial District, the Honorable John A. Thelen, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Samuel A. Gereszek, Grand Forks, N.D., for petitioner and appellant; on brief.
Andrew C. Eyre, Assistant State’s Attorney, Grand Forks, N.D., for respondent
and appellee; on brief.
Krogstad v. State
No. 20220264
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Jeffrey Krogstad appeals from an order dismissing his application
for post-conviction relief following an evidentiary hearing. He argues he
received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial attorney did not
demand a speedy trial or secure an independent DNA test. He also asserts
that the district court erred by failing to analyze whether he was prejudiced
by counsel’s representation. We conclude the district court’s findings regarding
the first prong, whether counsel’s conduct fell below an objective standard
of reasonableness, are not clearly erroneous. We summarily affirm under
N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). Broadwell v. State, 2014 ND 6, ¶ 7, 841 N.W.2d 750(“Courts need not address both elements of the ineffective assistance of counsel
test, and if a court can dispose of the case by addressing only one element, it is
encouraged to do so.”).
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jerod E. Tufte
Douglas A. Bahr
1