Schaff v. State
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT MAY 26, 2022 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2022 ND 115 Jessica Schaff, Petitioner and Appellant v. State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee No. 20210337 Appeal from the District Court of Morton County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Cynthia Feland, Judge. AFFIRMED. Per Curiam. Mark C. Sherer, Dickinson, ND, for petitioner and appellant. Chase R. Lingle, Assistant State’s Attorney, Mandan, ND, for respondent and appellee. Schaff v. State No. 20210337 Per Curiam. [¶1] Jessica Schaff appeals from an order denying her application for postconviction relief. A jury found Schaff guilty of two counts of child neglect and two counts of child endangerment. Schaff argues her trial counsel was ineffective because he failed to object when the State, without offering laboratory test results, elicited testimony from law enforcement that substances they found in her residence were illegal drugs. After holding an evidentiary hearing, the district court denied Schaff ’s application concluding the decision not to challenge the illegality of the substances was a matter of trial strategy. The court found Schaff ’s attorney’s conduct did not fall below an objective standard of reasonableness, and even if it did, Schaff did not show the results of the trial would have been different absent the alleged error. We conclude the district court’s findings are not clearly erroneous. See Truelove v. State, 2020 ND 142, ¶¶ 6, 11, 945 N.W.2d 272 (the clearly erroneous standard of review applies to findings of fact in post-conviction relief proceedings; matters of trial strategy will not be second-guessed on appeal). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). [¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. Gerald W. VandeWalle Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Daniel S. El-Dweek, D.J. [¶3] The Honorable Daniel S. El-Dweek, D.J., sitting in place of Crothers, J., disqualified. 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.
