Gaede v. State

                                                                                  FILED
                                                                          IN THE OFFICE OF THE
                                                                       CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
                                                                           DECEMBER 28, 2023
                                                                        STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA




                  IN THE SUPREME COURT
                  STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                                

Dennis James Gaede,                                  Petitioner and Appellant
      v.
State of North Dakota,                              Respondent and Appellee



                                No. 20230269

Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District,
the Honorable Steven E. McCullough, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Dennis J. Gaede, self-represented, Bismarck, N.D., petitioner and appellant;
submitted on brief.

Nicholas S. Samuelson, Assistant State’s Attorney, Fargo, N.D., for respondent
and appellee; submitted on brief.
                               Gaede v. State
                               No. 20230269

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Dennis James Gaede appeals from an order and judgment dismissing his
petition for postconviction relief. The district court concluded Gaede’s claims
were brought outside the statute of limitations provided in N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-
01(3)(b) and he had raised no genuine issue of material fact there was new
evidence to avoid the statute of limitations. After reviewing the record, we
conclude Gaede’s claim is outside the statute of limitations and he has raised
no genuine issue of fact on newly discovered evidence. We summarily affirm
under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6). See also Gaede v. State, 

, 

 (affirming district court’s finding “Gaede’s PTSD diagnosis is not
newly discovered evidence, and this claim was brought outside the statute of
limitations”); Gaede v. State, 

, 

 (summarily
affirming district court’s findings on claims of newly discovered evidence);
Gaede v. State, 

, 

 (res judicata precludes claims
that were raised or could have been raised in prior proceedings).

[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
     Daniel J. Crothers
     Lisa Fair McEvers
     Jerod E. Tufte
     Douglas A. Bahr




                                      1