[¶1] Mathew Richard Anderson appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury convicted him of murder under circumstances manifesting extreme indifference to the value of human life. He argues the district court abused its discretion by denying his Rule 29, N.D.R.Crim.P., motion for judgment of acquittal because insufficient evidence supports his conviction. After review of the record, we conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Andersons motion for judgment of acquittal, and sufficient evidence supports the conviction. We summarily affirm the criminal judgment under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). Per Curiam.
[¶2] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Daniel J. Crothers
Lisa Fair McEvers
Jerod E. Tufte
Douglas A. Bahr