State v. Bruederle

Annotate this Case

Court Description: District court orders and amended judgments revoking probation are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7).



IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2012 ND 26

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
William Cody Bruederle, Jr., Defendant and Appellant

Nos. 20110179 - 20110180

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable David E. Reich, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Jacob Tyler Rodenbiker, Assistant State's Attorney, 514 East Thayer Avenue, Bismarck, N.D. 58501, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
Kent M. Morrow, P.O. Box 2155, Bismarck, N.D. 58502-2155, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.

State v. BruederleNos. 20110179 - 20110180

Per Curiam.

[¶1] William Cody Bruederle, Jr., appeals from the district court's orders and amended criminal judgments revoking his probation. On appeal, Bruederle argues the court erred in revoking his probation based on an allegation that he committed a new offense because he had not been convicted of committing a new offense. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), (4), and (7). See State v. Wetzel, 2011 ND 218, 806 N.W.2d 193 (a criminal conviction is not required to revoke probation based on an allegation that the probationer committed a new offense).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Mary Muehlen Maring
Dale V. Sandstrom
Daniel J. Crothers

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.