State v. Cox
Annotate this CaseCourt Description: 116 Criminal judgment entered after a defendant pled guilty to delivery of methamphetamine is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2017 ND 116
State of North
Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Angela Diane
Cox, Defendant and Appellant
No. 20160380
Appeal from the District Court of Dunn County,
Southwest Judicial District, the Honorable Rhonda R.
Ehlis, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Pat J. Merriman, Dunn County State's Attorney Office,
Killdeer, N.D., for plaintiff and appellee.
Kiara Costa
Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, N.D., for defendant and appellant.
State v. CoxNo. 20160380
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Angela Cox appeals from a criminal judgment entered after she entered an open plea of guilty to delivery of a controlled substance, methamphetamine, a class A felony. Cox argues the sentencing court incorrectly concluded she breached her informant cooperation agreement. Her sentence was within statutory guidelines, and her arguments on appeal do not show the court relied on an impermissible factor. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7); State v. Corman, 2009 ND 85, ¶ 15, 765 N.W.2d 530 ("[T]his [C]ourt has no power to review the discretion of the sentencing court in fixing a term of imprisonment within the range authorized by statute. Appellate review of a criminal sentence is generally confined to whether the [district] court acted within the sentencing limits prescribed by statute, or substantially relied upon an impermissible factor." (quotations omitted)).
[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair
McEvers
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Jerod E. Tufte
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.