State v. Fleck, 971 N.W.2d 387

In March 2019 Fleck sold cattle to Kist Livestock (Morton County); Kist issued a $10,039 check payable to Corey Fleck and several lienholders.
A friend deposited that check at a bank in Grant County into Fleck’s account; the bank later determined several endorsements were fraudulent and withdrew the funds.
Kist reissued a check, obtained proper endorsements, and distributed proceeds by cashier’s checks under an agreement; Fleck received $400.
The State charged Fleck with one count of theft of property by deception (class B felony), alleging the total property stolen exceeded $10,000.
Fleck moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction (Morton County); the motion was denied. After a jury trial Fleck was convicted; he appealed arguing lack of venue and insufficiency of the evidence. The Supreme Court affirmed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Venue/jurisdiction	Part of the offense occurred in Morton County because victims, Kist Livestock, and Kist’s bank are located there; acts or effects in Morton County are sufficient for venue.	Only the deposit occurred, and that deposit occurred in Grant County, so Morton County lacks jurisdiction.	Venue proper in Morton County: acts or effects constituting the offense occurred there.
Whether value of property stolen exceeded $10,000	The initial check was for $10,039 and lien amounts exceeded $10,000, so the property taken met the statutory threshold.	The initial deposit was reversed, Fleck only received $400 from the reissued check, so the stolen amount was less than $10,000.	Jury could reasonably find the total property exceeded $10,000 based on the initial check and lien evidence.
Whether funds were property of lienholders and Fleck acted knowingly by deception	Lienholders were listed payees with claimed security interests; checks bore fraudulent endorsements and Fleck knew some endorsements were false—supporting knowing deception and that proceeds were property of lienholders.	Lienholders lacked bills of sale showing ownership of cattle proceeds; their liens do not equal ownership of the monies and State failed to prove Fleck knowingly obtained monies by deception.	Circumstantial evidence permitted a rational juror to find the lienholders had an interest in the proceeds and Fleck knowingly obtained property by deception.

State v. Kunkel, 548 N.W.2d 773 (N.D. 1996) (prosecution may be brought in any county where part of the offense occurred)
State v. Martinsons, 462 N.W.2d 458 (N.D. 1990) (acts in furtherance of a crime in a county confer jurisdiction there)
State v. Johnson, 964 N.W.2d 500 (N.D. 2021) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence)
State v. Spillum, 954 N.W.2d 673 (N.D. 2021) (circumstantial evidence can alone support conviction if probative)
State v. Clark, 868 N.W.2d 363 (N.D. 2015) (circumstantial-evidence instructions and review principles)