Myers v. State, 2017 ND 66

In April 2012 Myers pleaded guilty to aggravated assault (class C felony) and was sentenced to five years with five years suspended and five years supervised probation.
In August 2012 Myers pleaded guilty in three additional cases; those judgments imposed five-year sentences concurrent to each other but did not specify relation to the April 2012 sentence.
In April 2013 the State moved to revoke probation after a positive methamphetamine test; the court revoked probation and entered amended judgments totaling ten years via a mix of concurrent and consecutive terms.
Myers filed a postconviction relief (PCR) application in August 2013 claiming the court failed to advise him revocation could result in additional prison time; the district court denied relief after an evidentiary hearing and this Court summarily affirmed (Myers v. State, 2015 ND 54).
In April 2015 Myers filed a second PCR application arguing the post-revocation ten-year sentence was illegal and he should have received only five years; the State moved to dismiss as a misuse of process and the district court summarily dismissed without a hearing.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the district court erred by summarily dismissing Myers’ April 2015 PCR application	Myers: district court failed to address his claim that the ten-year sentence after probation revocation was illegal	State: Myers misused the PCR process by failing to raise the illegality claim in his earlier (2013) PCR application	Court: Affirmed dismissal — Myers misused the PCR process by inexcusably failing to raise the claim earlier; summary dismissal proper
Whether miscommunication with counsel or misunderstanding of process excuses successive PCR filing	Myers: ineffective communication with prior counsel prevented raising the issue earlier	State: neither miscommunication nor misunderstanding excuses failure to raise claim; no new evidence shown	Court: Such miscommunication/misunderstanding do not excuse failure to raise claim; no newly discovered evidence alleged; misuse established

Wacht v. State, 864 N.W.2d 740 (N.D. 2015) (PCR proceedings are civil and summary-dismissal standard applies)
Haag v. State, 823 N.W.2d 749 (N.D. 2012) (same principle on civil nature of PCR proceedings)
Myers v. State, 861 N.W.2d 172 (N.D. 2015) (prior appeal where this Court concluded Myers did not properly raise sentence-illegality issue in district court)
Steen v. State, 736 N.W.2d 457 (N.D. 2007) (applicants must raise all claims in a single PCR proceeding)
Jensen v. State, 688 N.W.2d 374 (N.D. 2004) (reiterating that subsequent PCR applications raising issues that could have been raised earlier constitute misuse)
Garcia v. State, 678 N.W.2d 568 (N.D. 2004) (newly discovered evidence may excuse successive PCR filings)
Schmidt v. City of Minot, 883 N.W.2d 909 (N.D. 2016) (appellate courts may affirm for different reasons if result is correct under proper law)