STATE v. ENNEN

Per Curiam.

[¶ 1] John Ennen appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury found him guilty of surreptitious intrusion, a class C felony, under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-12.2. On appeal, Ennen argues the evidence is insufficient to sustain his conviction and the district court committed reversible error when it responded to the jury's request for a ruler outside of his presence. We conclude sufficient evidence exists to support the verdict. On this record, we conclude the court's decision to comply with the jury's request for a ruler was harmless error. See State v. Hatch, 346 N.W.2d 268, 278 (N.D. 1984) (violation of defendant's right to be present during communication between the judge and the jury after the case has been submitted to the jury may be harmless error). We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).

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