Johnson v. State, 790 N.W.2d 741

In 2008 Johnson was convicted by a jury of two counts of contact by bodily fluids in a bifurcated trial (criminal act and criminal responsibility phases).
The North Dakota Supreme Court summarily affirmed the conviction in State v. Johnson, 2008 ND 168, 756 N.W.2d 548.
Johnson then filed an initial post-conviction-relief petition asserting ineffective assistance of trial counsel and prosecutorial misconduct; the district court denied and this was summarily affirmed.
Johnson later sent a letter requesting an evidentiary hearing, which the district court treated as a second post-conviction-relief application and denied as res judicata without a State response.
A third post-conviction-relief application followed, with Johnson, unrepresented, claiming insufficient evidence of criminal responsibility and ineffective assistance by his direct-appeal and first-application counsel; the district court summarily dismissed on res judicata and misuse-of-process theories on its own motion.
The appellate court reverses, holding district court cannot dismiss on res judicata/misuse of process on its own motion and remands for further proceedings with State response.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
May district court dismiss post-conviction relief on its own motion based on res judicata or misuse of process?	Johnson argues such dismissal is improper without State response.	State would contend res judicata/misuse of process can justify dismissal.	No; district court erred; these are affirmative defenses for the State to plead.
Should an evidentiary hearing have been held on Johnson's insufficiency-of-evidence and ineffective-assistance claims?	Johnson seeks an evidentiary hearing to develop material facts.	State contends prior rulings foreclose further consideration.	Yes; remand for an evidentiary hearing and State response.
Did prior Supreme Court review bar the claims via res judicata?	Johnson contends previous rulings do not preclude new claims raised in current application.	State asserts res judicata based on prior affirmations.	District court erred in applying res judicata; current application merits further proceedings.

State v. Johnson, 2008 ND 168, 756 N.W.2d 548 (ND 2008) (per curiam addressing sufficiency of evidence for criminal act)
Berlin v. State, 698 N.W.2d 266 (ND 2005) (dismissal for failure to state a claim must be sparing and careful)
Delvo v. State, 782 N.W.2d 72 (ND 2010) (summary denial analyzed like summary judgment)
Jacob v. State, 782 N.W.2d 61 (ND 2010) (clear-error standard for factual findings in post-conviction relief)
Noorlun v. State, 736 N.W.2d 477 (ND 2007) (standards for reviewing post-conviction relief)
Ennis v. Dasovick, 506 N.W.2d 386 (ND 1993) (procedural limits on dismissal and affirmative defenses)