Opinion
Nos. 20180265 20180266
02-21-2019
STATE of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Daniel Lynn GOLDSACK, Defendant and Appellant
Justin J. Schwarz, Assistant State’s Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief. Russell J. Myhre, Enderlin, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.
Justin J. Schwarz, Assistant State’s Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
Russell J. Myhre, Enderlin, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Daniel Goldsack appeals from a district court’s second amended criminal judgments revoking his probation. Goldsack argues the district court clearly erred in finding a probation violation occurred and the State did not prove by a preponderance of the evidence Goldsack violated the conditions of his probation. We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4) and (7). See, e.g., State v. McAvoy , 2007 ND 178, ¶¶ 9, 18, 741 N.W.2d 198 (holding the trial court’s factual findings of a probation violation were not clearly erroneous and concluding the court did not abuse its discretion in revoking the defendant’s probation).
[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jon J. Jensen
Jerod E. Tufte