State v. SwearingenNo. 20110227
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Matthew Swearingen appeals from a trial court's judgment finding him guilty of gross sexual imposition. On appeal, Swearingen claims there is insufficient evidence to support the trial court's decision. Specifically, Swearingen argues it was neither alleged nor proven that his conduct was "for the purpose of arousing or satisfying sexual or aggressive desires." N.D.C.C. 12.1-20-02(5).
[¶2] We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).
[¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Mary Muehlen Maring
Daniel J. Crothers
Dale V. Sandstrom
Carol Ronning Kapsner