Wong v. State
790 N.W.2d 757
| N.D. | 2010Background
- Wong pled guilty in Dec 2009 to gross sexual imposition (class AA) and aggravated assault (class C); judgment entered; no direct appeal.
- On Apr 12, 2010, Wong sought post-conviction relief, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, unlawful guilty plea due to incompetence, and prior incompetence finding.
- State answered on May 12, 2010, arguing defense counsel effective, no ineffective assistance, and waiver of mental-capacity issues; no summary-dismissal motion filed.
- District court sua sponte dismissed on May 25, 2010 under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-06(2) for lack of supporting facts.
- Wong appeals; district court had authority but erred; issue involves procedural due process and whether dismissal without notice was proper.
- Appellate court reverses and remands, holding summary dismissal without notice and chance to respond violated due process and statutory requirements.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the district court erred by sua sponte dismissing without notice | Wong argues no notice or chance to respond; misapplication of §29-32.1-06(2). | Court may dismiss on its own initiative where no facts support relief. | Erroneous; must provide notice and opportunity to respond. |
| Whether summary dismissal standards apply in post-conviction context | Questions of ineffective assistance require record development; cannot be decided on pleadings. | Dismissal follows procedural analogies to Rule 12(b)(6) and summary judgment when appropriate. | Procedural safeguards apply; cannot summarily decide on pleadings alone. |
| Whether Wong's claims could potentially entitle relief | Claims include ineffective assistance and illegitimate plea, which could be proven with record evidence. | No support in pleadings to show entitlement to relief. | Not impossible to prove; dismissal improper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Berlin v. State, 2005 ND 110 (ND) (summary dismissal standards and need for hearing when appropriate)
- Henke v. State, 2009 ND 117 (ND) (ineffective-assistance claims generally not suited for quick dismissal)
- Kaiser v. State, 2005 ND 49 (ND) (dismissal mechanics when considering outside-the-pleadings evidence)
- Parizek v. State, 2006 ND 61 (ND) (inherent authority to summarily dismiss requires no genuine material facts)
- Vandeberg v. State, 2003 ND 71 (ND) (application must be developed with opportunity to prove grounds)
- Johnson v. State, 2004 ND 130 (ND) (pleadings treated with favorable view to applicant on dismissal appeal)
- Weaver v. State, 2003 ND 47 (ND) (requirement that applications provide concise grounds without evidence)