State v. Evans, 2013 ND 195

Evans towed an empty trailer; the trailer decoupled and struck Denise Hoffert, killing her.
Evans was charged with negligent homicide under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-16-03.
During discovery, State did not disclose expert witnesses; trial featured a lay witness, Officer Huston, offering limited collision analysis.
The court initially allowed Huston’s testimony outside the jury and required disclosure of his qualifications.
Evans argued Huston testified as an expert; trial court prohibited causation opinions but allowed general braking-related testimony.
Jury convicted Evans; motions for judgment of acquittal and for a new trial were denied; the District Court later denied post-trial motions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of the evidence	Evans failed to prove negligent homicide elements.	Evidence shows only an accident and no gross deviation.	Evidence supports guilt beyond reasonable doubt.
Admission of Officer Huston's testimony as expert	Huston provided expert analysis from accident reconstruction.	Huston was a lay witness; his testimony should be limited.	Court did not abuse discretion; testimony was permissible lay opinion.
Prosecutorial misconduct	State mischaracterized Evans’s testimony about chains and brakes.	Misstatements violated due process.	No reversible misconduct; any error was harmless or not prejudicial.

State v. Romero, 2013 ND 77 (ND 2013) (sufficiency standard; Rule 29 posture)
State v. Bruce, 2012 ND 140 (ND 2012) (insufficient evidence standard on appeal)
State v. Saulter, 2009 ND 78 (ND 2009) (distinguishing lay vs expert testimony; harmless error)
State v. Pena Garcia, 2012 ND 11 (ND 2012) (improper argument generally not reversible error)
State v. Montano, 2012 ND 59 (ND 2012) (prosecutorial misconduct context; harmless in some instances)
Witzke v. State, 2009 ND 169 (ND 2009) (requiring appellate restraint in record searches)