Williamson v. State , 2022 ND 192 ( 2022 )

FILED
IN THE OFFICE OF THE
CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
NOVEMBER 10, 2022
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT
STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2022 ND 192Robert Williamson, Petitioner and Appellant
v.
State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee
No. 20220186
Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial
District, the Honorable James S. Hill, Judge.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
Per Curiam.
Scott O. Diamond, Fargo, ND, for petitioner and appellant; submitted on brief.
Julie A. Lawyer, State’s Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for respondent and appellee;
submitted on brief.
Williamson v. State
No. 20220186
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Robert Williamson appeals from an order denying his application for
post-conviction relief. Williamson argues the district court erred by dismissing
his application, on its own motion, after the State filed an answer. We conclude
the district court erred by denying Williamson’s application because the
procedure required under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09 for summary disposition in
post-conviction relief cases was not followed. See Chase v. State, 2021 ND 206,
¶¶ 8-11, 966 N.W.2d 557 (holding a motion for summary disposition in post-
conviction relief proceedings must be made consistent with the rules for motion
practice and the district court may not order summary disposition in response
to a request in a pleading); State v. Vogt, 2019 ND 236, ¶ 8, 933 N.W.2d 916(stating the district court may only summarily dismiss an application for post-
conviction relief on its own motion under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09(1) before the
State responds, and after the State responds there must be a motion by either
party under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09(3) for the court to grant summary
disposition). We summarily reverse under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(b) and remand
for further proceedings.
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Gerald W. VandeWalle
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jerod E. Tufte
1