State v. Lindeman

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT DECEMBER 9, 2021 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2021 ND 220 State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Barry Mervyn Lindeman, Defendant and Appellant No. 20210159 Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, North Central Judicial District, the Honorable Douglas L. Mattson, Judge. AFFIRMED. Per Curiam. Christopher W. Nelson, Assistant State’s Attorney, Minot, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief. Samuel A. Gereszek, Grand Forks, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief. State v. Lindeman No. 20210159 Per Curiam. [¶1] Barry Mervyn Lindeman appeals from a judgment of conviction for gross sexual imposition, arguing there was insufficient evidence the offense happened within the time period listed in the charging documents and jury instructions. [¶2] “A precise date or time period is not required in a criminal prosecution unless time is an essential element of an offense.” Davies v. State, 2018 ND 211, ¶ 17, 917 N.W.2d 8. Time is not an element of gross sexual imposition. Id. at ¶ 20. Because Lindeman’s only argument pertains to the timeline and this Court has held a precise time period is not required, we summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7). [¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte 1

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.