The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed the murder conviction of Shawnee Lynn Krall for the intentional killing of his roommate Alice Queirolo in a case that stemmed from events in December 2020.
Chief Justice Fair McEvers authored the unanimous opinion in *State v. Krall*, rejecting the defendant's appeal and upholding the jury's guilty verdict. The court concluded that the State presented sufficient evidence for a jury to find Krall guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of intentional or knowing murder.
The case originated from tragic circumstances in Minot, North Dakota. In December 2020, Queirolo lived in a house that she owned and rented out bedrooms to two roommates for additional income. Krall had been renting a basement room since August 2020 and lived there until his arrest. A second roommate had been renting a room in the residence beginning in September 2020.
Queirolo was reported missing to the Minot Police Department on Dec. 21, 2020, after she failed to report to work as expected that day. The disappearance triggered an investigation that led to Krall's arrest for Queirolo's murder.
The legal proceedings in the case were complex and involved multiple delays. Krall was initially charged by citation dated Dec. 22, 2020, just one day after Queirolo was reported missing. The State later filed a formal information on June 7, 2021, followed by an amended information dated Aug. 29, 2023.
The amended information charged Krall with two alternative counts under North Dakota's murder statute. The first count alleged intentional or knowing murder under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-16-01(1)(a), while the second count alleged murder under extreme indifference to human life under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-16-01(1)(b). This charging strategy allowed prosecutors to present the case to the jury under different legal theories while seeking the same ultimate conviction.
Before trial, the case experienced a number of procedural delays, including complications related to evidence suppression issues. The district court had issued an order suppressing certain evidence, which the State appealed. These pre-trial proceedings contributed to the extended timeline before the case reached a jury.
The case was tried in the District Court of Ward County, North Central Judicial District, before the Honorable Stacy J. Louser. After hearing the evidence, a jury found Krall guilty of intentional or knowing murder of Alice Queirolo. The district court subsequently entered an amended criminal judgment reflecting the conviction.
On appeal, Krall challenged both the sufficiency of the evidence and certain jury instruction decisions made by the trial court. Specifically, Krall argued that the district court committed reversible error in rejecting his requested jury instruction on circumstantial evidence. This type of instruction typically advises jurors about how to evaluate cases that rely heavily on indirect evidence rather than direct eyewitness testimony.
The North Dakota Supreme Court rejected both of Krall's main arguments on appeal. In addressing the sufficiency of the evidence claim, Chief Justice McEvers wrote that the State had presented sufficient evidence for a jury to find Krall guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. This finding means the court determined that a reasonable jury could have concluded that the prosecution's evidence, viewed in the light most favorable to the State, established Krall's guilt to the required legal standard.
Regarding the jury instruction dispute, the Supreme Court concluded that the district court did not commit reversible error in rejecting Krall's requested instruction on circumstantial evidence. Trial courts have discretion in crafting jury instructions, and appellate courts will only reverse when the trial court's decision constitutes an abuse of that discretion or results in prejudicial error.
The case was handled by experienced legal counsel on both sides. Assistant State's Attorney Tiffany M. Sorgen of Minot represented the State as plaintiff and appellee, while Samuel A. Gereszek of Grand Forks served as defense counsel for Krall as defendant and appellant.
The Supreme Court's affirmance means Krall's murder conviction stands, and he will serve whatever sentence was imposed by the district court. The opinion, designated as 2026 ND 7, becomes part of North Dakota's legal precedent and may be cited in future criminal cases involving similar legal issues.
The case represents another example of the North Dakota Supreme Court's approach to reviewing criminal convictions, emphasizing deference to jury verdicts when sufficient evidence supports the conviction and trial courts when they make reasonable decisions about jury instructions. The court's unanimous decision suggests there were no close legal questions that divided the justices.