State v. Nuessle
Annotate this CaseAfter a jury trial, Defendant was convicted of felony obstructing justice. Defendant appealed, claiming (1) the district court improperly instructed the jury regarding the “knowing” element of obstructing justice, thus violating Defendant’s due process rights; and (2) defense counsel was ineffective for failing to submit a jury instruction defining the statutory term “knowing.” The Supreme Court affirmed, holding (1) the jury was properly instructed on all of the elements of the offense even without an instruction defining “knowing” because the word “knowing,” within the stated elements of the offense, fulfilled a limited purpose that was commonly understood by the jurors; and (2) Defendant failed to establish that he received ineffective assistance of counsel.
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.