Rencountre v. State
2015 ND 62
N.D.2015Background
- In Oct. 2010, hotel desk clerk shot; security video captured the shooting and described the shooter as a large man in a dark hoodie and ballcap.
- Police later pursued a white CAT-logoed truck; Rencountre stopped after high-speed chase, pistol in hand, intoxicated with liquor, and admitted the shooting after waiving rights.
- Rencountre was charged with attempted murder (A felony) and fleeing/eluding a peace officer (C felony); a special dangerous offender notice was filed to enhance the penalty.
- A mental health evaluation found Rencountre competent and not mentally ill at the time; on Apr. 27, 2011, he pled guilty to attempted murder; fleeing was dismissed; judge found him a special dangerous offender; sentenced to 30 years with 10 suspended and 5 years’ probation.
- Rencountre later sought postconviction relief alleging ineffective assistance of counsel and improper sentencing procedure under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-02(11); the district court denied relief, and the appellate court affirmed, finding no ineffective assistance and harmless error regarding the missing written record.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ineffective assistance for not filing suppression | Rencountre alleges counsel should have moved to suppress statements. | Counsel testified suppression could go either way and overwhelming evidence remained. | No deficient performance or prejudice shown. |
| Failure to obtain a second mental health evaluation | Second evaluation could have changed trial/plea outcome. | No proven benefit; no records show a different result from a second opinion. | Not ineffective assistance; no prejudice. |
| Harmless error from missing written criminal record before sentencing | Statutory requirement to have a written report before sentencing was violated. | Error deemed harmless under Rule 52(a). | Harmless error; no resentencing required. |
Key Cases Cited
- Osier v. State, 2014 ND 41 (North Dakota (2014)) (ineffective assistance and mixed questions of law and fact; Strickland standard applied)
- Broadwell v. State, 2014 ND 6 (North Dakota (2014)) (burden on postconviction relief; when to address Strickland prongs)
- Bahtiraj v. State, 2013 ND 240 (North Dakota (2013)) (Strickland prejudice prong guidance; mixed questions of fact and law)
- Kinsella v. State, 2013 ND 238 (North Dakota (2013)) (prejudice analysis; defining deficient performance and outcome probability)
- Dahl v. State, 2013 ND 25 (North Dakota (2013)) (prejudice and performance standards in postconviction reviews)