State v. Bazile, 971 N.W.2d 884

In July 2017, 13-year-old T.Y.C. stayed with family in Fargo; 20-year-old Mackenzy Bazile slept in the same room and was later accused of sexual intercourse with her.
T.Y.C. became pregnant; DNA testing showed a high probability Bazile was the father.
Bazile was charged with gross sexual imposition and trial proceeded in April 2021.
The district court ordered witness sequestration before trial. During cross-examination, the prosecutor asked Bazile whether family members were supporting him and whether they watched the victims testify; defense objected and the court sustained.
Bazile moved for a mistrial alleging prosecutorial misconduct intended to taint the jury; the court denied mistrial, gave a curative instruction to ignore the comment, and the jury convicted Bazile.
On appeal Bazile argued (1) the prosecutor’s question amounted to misconduct warranting a mistrial and (2) the district court erred by not making findings on the record when denying his mistrial motion.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether prosecutor's cross-examination about witness support was prosecutorial misconduct requiring mistrial	The State conceded the question was improper but argued a curative instruction cured any prejudice	Bazile argued the question intentionally tainted the jury and deprived him of a fair trial, so mistrial was required	Court treated the question as conceded misconduct but held the single, isolated question—followed by a curative instruction and not repeated—was not sufficiently prejudicial; denial of mistrial affirmed
Whether the district court was required to state factual findings on the record when denying a trial motion for mistrial	State: no rule requires on-the-record findings for motions made during trial	Bazile: the court should have made factual findings on the record after ruling on prosecutorial-misconduct motion	Court held North Dakota criminal rules do not require on-the-record findings for motions made at trial; no error

State v. Foster, 942 N.W.2d 829 (N.D. 2020) (sets analysis for prosecutorial misconduct and prejudice; de novo review of misconduct claims)
State v. Skarsgard, 739 N.W.2d 786 (N.D. 2007) (motions for mistrial reviewed for abuse of discretion)
State v. Carlson, 881 N.W.2d 649 (N.D. 2016) (curative jury instruction can cure prejudice from improper testimony)