Morales v. State
2019 ND 137
| N.D. | 2019Background
- Morales drove a minivan while intoxicated (0.209% BAC) and collided with a goose-neck trailer in an RV park; his wife, a passenger, died.
- He was charged under N.D.C.C. § 39-08-01.2(1) (causing death while operating a vehicle under the influence); a prior Florida conviction exposed him to a ten-year mandatory minimum.
- Nicole Foster was appointed as counsel; Morales entered a conditional guilty plea preserving a suppression issue and obtained a plea deal that avoided the harsher mandatory sentence.
- Morales filed a pro se post-conviction relief application, then an amended application through counsel alleging ineffective assistance of counsel based on Foster’s alleged assurances about winning on appeal.
- The State moved to summarily dismiss; the district court granted dismissal, finding Morales’s claims conclusory and unsupported by competent evidence. Morales appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether summary dismissal of an ineffective-assistance claim was proper | Morales: Foster assured him he would win on appeal and he would not have pled guilty if so advised | State: Morales’s affidavit is conclusory, contradicts record, and fails to show prejudice under Strickland/Hill | Affirmed — summary dismissal proper; Morales failed to raise a genuine issue on prejudice |
| Whether Morales showed the Strickland deficient-performance prong | Morales: counsel’s assurances induced his plea | State: record and filings do not support an objectively deficient performance fact issue | Not reached — court resolved case on prejudice prong |
| Whether Morales showed the Strickland prejudice prong (would have gone to trial) | Morales: he would not have pled guilty; wanted to plead no contest and tell his version | State: Morales never said he would have insisted on trial; no rational basis shown to reject plea | Held: Morales failed to show a reasonable probability he would have rejected the plea and prevailed at trial |
| Whether the affidavit created a genuine issue of material fact | Morales: affidavit and related materials suffice to require an evidentiary hearing | State: motion put Morales to proof and affidavit is unsupported/conclusory | Held: affidavit is conclusory; no competent evidentiary support; summary dismissal appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668 (1984) (two-prong ineffective-assistance standard: performance and prejudice)
- Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52 (1985) (prejudice standard for guilty-plea challenges: would defendant have gone to trial?)
- Brewer v. State, 924 N.W.2d 87 (N.D. 2019) (ineffective-assistance review is mixed question; petitioner bears burden)
- Stein v. State, 920 N.W.2d 477 (N.D. 2018) (summary dismissal standard for post-conviction claims)
- Horvath v. State, 905 N.W.2d 734 (N.D. 2018) (applicant must present competent admissible evidence to avoid summary dismissal)
- Bahtiraj v. State, 840 N.W.2d 605 (N.D. 2013) (mere subjective assertions insufficient to show prejudice)
- Leavitt v. State, 898 N.W.2d 435 (N.D. 2017) (genuine issue exists if reasonable minds could draw different inferences)
- Booth v. State, 893 N.W.2d 186 (N.D. 2017) (courts may resolve ineffective-assistance claims on either Strickland prong)