Lindsey v. State
2014 ND 174
| N.D. | 2014Background
- In 2007 Lindsey pleaded guilty to class AA murder after notifying intent to assert lack of criminal responsibility; she was sentenced to 40 years (20 suspended).
- Before the plea the State disclosed Dr. Joseph Belanger’s psychological evaluation finding Lindsey did not meet the standard for lack of criminal responsibility; Lindsey had her own expert (Dr. Robert Gulkin) whose 2006 evaluation found a mental disease/defect.
- Lindsey later moved for post-conviction relief (filed 2012), alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, newly discovered evidence (Belanger’s later criminal convictions and admissions of mental illness), and prosecutorial misconduct for not producing audio/video of Belanger interviews.
- The State moved for summary dismissal (and raised laches); the district court summarily dismissed Lindsey’s application (partly on laches). Lindsey appealed.
- The Supreme Court held the district court erred in resolving laches on summary disposition but affirmed dismissal on the correct legal basis: Lindsey failed to present competent evidence raising genuine issues of material fact on ineffective assistance, newly evidence, or prosecutorial misconduct.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance of counsel (pre-plea) | Counsel failed to obtain Belanger transcripts, gave conflicting advice, coerced plea, and Lindsey was medicated/confused | Record shows Lindsey understood plea, waived NCR, had her own expert, and offered no affidavits or medical records to create factual dispute | Denied — Lindsey failed to produce evidence creating a genuine issue that counsel’s performance fell below Strickland standard |
| Newly discovered evidence (Belanger’s later convictions/mental issues) | Belanger’s subsequent arrest/letter show he was mentally ill and undermines his 2006 evaluation; would have affected trial strategy | Belanger’s later conduct does not prove his 2006 evaluation was incorrect; no affidavit or proof undermining the evaluation; Lindsey waived trial by pleading guilty | Denied — weight/quality of evidence would not likely produce acquittal; no manifest injustice shown |
| Prosecutorial misconduct (failure to produce interview recordings) | State failed to produce audio/video of Belanger interviews which would contradict his report and be "devastating" to defense | Lindsey knew of the issue pre-plea (motion in limine) and did not submit recordings/transcripts or show how they vitiate voluntariness of plea | Denied — claim waived by guilty plea and no evidence presented to show plea was involuntary |
| Laches defense raised by State | Lindsey argues delay was reasonable and court erred applying laches on summary disposition | State asserted nearly seven-year delay and identified prejudice (lost files, deceased witnesses, destroyed evidence, Belanger unavailable) | Court erred to make factual findings on laches at summary stage, but result stands because Lindsey failed to meet her burden of proof on merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Coppage v. State, 807 N.W.2d 585 (N.D. 2011) (summary dismissal standard in post-conviction proceedings)
- Henke v. State, 767 N.W.2d 881 (N.D. 2009) (burden when State moves for summary disposition)
- Johnson v. State, 714 N.W.2d 832 (N.D. 2006) (laches may be raised by State in post-conviction cases)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (U.S. 1984) (two-part ineffective-assistance standard)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (U.S. 1985) (Strickland applied to guilty-plea prejudice inquiry)
- Moore v. State, 839 N.W.2d 834 (N.D. 2013) (manifest injustice standard for withdrawing guilty plea)
- Bahtiraj v. State, 840 N.W.2d 605 (N.D. 2013) (burden and deference in ineffective-assistance claims)