History
  • No items yet
midpage
974 N.W.2d 401
N.D.
2022
Read the full case

Background

  • Defendant Randy Joseph Houle was charged with aggravated assault, criminal attempt, and false information to law enforcement; a jury trial occurred in November 2021.
  • Houle and the State both requested North Dakota pattern jury instruction K-5.16 addressing direct and circumstantial evidence; the district court used that pattern instruction.
  • Houle received the instructions before trial, had two opportunities to object or request additional instructions, but did not object and agreed to the instructions as given.
  • The district court granted a Rule 29 motion as to criminal attempt; the jury convicted Houle of aggravated assault and false information; he was sentenced to five years with one year suspended.
  • On appeal Houle argued the court erred by not including additional language requiring circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable theory of innocence.

Issues

Issue Plaintiff's Argument Defendant's Argument Held
Whether the jury instruction on direct vs. circumstantial evidence was legally deficient State: the pattern instruction was proper and the additional "exclude every reasonable theory" instruction is disfavored Houle: omission of language requiring circumstantial evidence to exclude every reasonable theory of innocence affected his substantial rights Court: No reviewable error — Houle invited the instructions by requesting/agreeing to them; appellate relief barred

Key Cases Cited

  • Holland v. United States, 348 U.S. 121 (1954) (rejected mandatory "exclude every reasonable hypothesis" circumstantial-evidence instruction as confusing when reasonable-doubt standard is given)
  • State v. Rende, 907 N.W.2d 361 (N.D. 2018) (invited-error doctrine precludes challenging trial rulings a party invited)
  • State v. White Bird, 858 N.W.2d 642 (N.D. 2015) (invited error doctrine and limits on reversal for invited errors)
  • State v. Watkins, 898 N.W.2d 442 (N.D. 2017) (defendant cannot seek reversal based on error he invited)
  • United States v. Marcus, 560 U.S. 258 (2010) (discusses narrow category of structural errors that survive invited-error analysis)
Read the full case

Case Details

Case Name: State v. Houle
Court Name: North Dakota Supreme Court
Date Published: May 12, 2022
Citations: 974 N.W.2d 401; 2022 ND 96; 20210331
Docket Number: 20210331
Court Abbreviation: N.D.
Log In
    State v. Houle, 974 N.W.2d 401