State v. KnightNo. 20070047

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Mark Knight appeals from a criminal judgment following a bench trial in which he was found guilty of gross sexual imposition, a Class A felony. Knight argues there was insufficient evidence to support a guilty verdict. He also argues the district court erred in failing to rule on a N.D.R.Crim.P. 29 motion for judgment of acquittal made at the close of the State's case-in-chief. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7), holding there was sufficient evidence to support the conviction, and concluding any error in failing to rule on the Rule 29 motion was harmless in this case, because the State presented sufficient evidence to support a conviction in its case-in-chief. See State v. Olson, 244 N.W.2d 718, 721 (N.D. 1976) (if the evidence is sufficient to meet the standard under N.D.R.Crim.P. 29 when the State rests, "then any error in failing to rule promptly is harmless").

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