State v. Glaum, 2024 ND 47

Joseph Glaum was charged in October 2021 with two counts of gross sexual imposition related to events alleged to have occurred in November 2015.
Glaum entered conditional guilty (Alford) pleas in January 2023, expressly reserving six issues for appeal.
He sought to withdraw his guilty pleas prior to sentencing, claiming ineffective assistance of counsel and various procedural and evidentiary errors.
The district court denied his motions to withdraw the pleas and proceeded to sentencing.
Glaum appealed on grounds including denial of his speedy trial right, judicial bias, evidence admissibility, and ineffective assistance claims.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Withdraw Guilty Plea	Glaum failed to show fair and just reason; plea was knowing/voluntary	Court misapplied relevant factors; sufficient reason to withdraw	Denial of withdrawal affirmed; no abuse of discretion
Judicial Bias (Recusal)	No evidence of bias; prior employment is insufficient	Judge’s prior DA office work and comments show bias	No abuse of discretion; motion for recusal properly denied
Speedy Trial Claim	Delays attributable to Glaum; no prejudice or assertion of right	Lengthy delay, some due to court or state; right to speedy trial	No violation; Barker factors not met
Amendment/Add Witnesses	Defendant had prior notice; no substantial prejudice	Late witnesses/amendment prejudiced right to fair trial	Grant of amendment and denial of continuance upheld

State v. Guthmiller, 924 N.W.2d 785 (N.D. 2019) (standard for withdrawing guilty pleas; abuse of discretion review)
State v. Lium, 758 N.W.2d 711 (N.D. 2008) (enumerates factors for considering withdrawal of guilty plea)
Barker v. Wingo, 407 U.S. 514 (1972) (establishes four-factor balancing test for speedy trial claims)
State v. Blurton, 770 N.W.2d 231 (N.D. 2009) (conditional pleas reserve specific issues for appeal, limits scope of appellate review)
State v. Owens, 860 N.W.2d 817 (N.D. 2015) (applies Barker test to speedy trial challenges)