State v. Frederick
Case Date: 06/01/2006
Docket No: 20050432
|
State v. FrederickNo. 20050432 Per Curiam. [¶1] Douglas James Frederick appeals from a criminal judgment entered upon his conditional guilty pleas to charges of manufacture of a controlled substance, possession of drug paraphernalia, and abuse or neglect of a child. He argues the district court erred by denying his motion to suppress the evidence seized during execution of a search warrant at his residence. [¶2] Whether probable cause exists is a question of law which is fully reviewable on appeal. State v. Rangeloff, 1998 ND 135, ¶ 16, 580 N.W.2d 593. A district court's disposition of a suppression motion "will not be reversed if, after conflicts in the testimony are resolved in favor of affirmance, there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the trial court's findings, and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence." State v. Zimmerman, 529 N.W.2d 171, 173 (N.D. 1995). [¶3] We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). [¶4]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. |