A.R. Audit Services, Inc. v. Ulledahl
2011 ND 83
| N.D. | 2011Background
- Zottnick was convicted by a jury of violating an order prohibiting contact with Katie Abt issued October 19, 2009.
- The order prohibited direct or indirect contact, including calls, emails, visits, messages, or approaching within 100 yards, and consent by Abt did not invalidate the order.
- Evidence at trial showed multiple forms of contact by Zottnick with Abt from November 1–3, 2009, plus an incident at Abt’s parents’ residence and an audio recording.
- Zottnick sought a jury instruction on excuse under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-05-08; the district court refused, finding no clear basis in the record.
- The jury was instructed on the essential elements of the offense, and Zottnick was found guilty; he challenges both the instruction and the sufficiency of the evidence.
- The Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, ruling on both the instruction issue and the sufficiency of the evidence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred by refusing the excuse instruction | Zottnick argues facts supported excuse under 12.1-05-08. | The record lacked evidence of facts justifying an excuse instruction. | No error; instruction properly refused. |
| Whether the evidence supports the conviction | Competent evidence showed direct contact violated the order. | Evidence failed to establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt. | Sufficient competent evidence supported the verdict. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ness, 2009 ND 182 (N.D. 2009) (excuse instruction available when evidence supports justification or excuse)
- State v. Leidholm, 334 N.W.2d 811 (N.D. 1983) (distinguishes justification vs. excuse in N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-05)
- State v. Fridley, 335 N.W.2d 785 (N.D. 1983) (mistake-of-law excuse not applicable to strict-liability offenses)
- State v. Ronne, 458 N.W.2d 294 (N.D. 1990) (limits on excuse when not supported by proper purposes)
- State v. Nygaard, 447 N.W.2d 267 (N.D. 1989) (no excuse instruction where not tied to recognized purposes)
- State v. Rasmussen, 524 N.W.2d 843 (N.D. 1994) (imminent-threat defense in driving-related context)
- State v. Purdy, 491 N.W.2d 402 (N.D. 1992) (discussion of excuse instruction arrangements)
- State v. Wanner, 2010 ND 121 (N.D. 2010) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence in criminal convictions)