and requires. The words remain true today. [¶ 14] If the record did not reflect actual knowledge on Mora’s part, we would reverse because of the inadequacy of the allegations of the information. But, the transcript does reveal, and his counsel conceded, Mora was aware the State intended to use prior convictions to seek the mandatory minimum sentence and the State provided Mora with certified copies of the record relating to his prior convictions during discovery. [¶ 15] Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52, i.e., any “error, defect, irregularity or variance which does not affect substantial rights shall be disregarded.” Because Mora had notice the State was alleging a prior offense and of the specific offenses it was alleging, no substantial right was affected. State v. Gielen, 210 N.W. at 975 (<HOLDING>); State v. Bloomdale, 21 N.D. 77, 128 N.W. 682
holding that there is no constitutional right to appeal a criminal conviction recognizing that a claim is an assertion of a right and if there is no assertion of a right there is no claim to deduct holding no ineffective assistance of appellate counsel claim for failure to raise as basis for appeal of conviction ineffective assistance of trial counsel where basis for the latter claim was inadequate holding there was no claim and no basis for a claim of surprise concerning allegation of a former conviction holding that when there was no surprise and no prejudice defendant was entitled to rely on defense of accord and satisfaction in its summary judgment motion even though it was not included in the pleadings