City of Grand Forks v. Ramstad

20020120 City of Grand Forks, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Darin Lee Ramstad, Defendant and Appellant

Appeal from: District Court, Northeast Central Judicial District, Grand Forks County
Judge Joel D. Medd
Nature of Action: Dui/Dus
Counsel:
Appellant: Larivee & Light
Appellee: Gary E. Euren , City Prosecutor
Term: 10/2002   Argument: 10/31/2002  2:45pm
ND cite: 2003 ND 41
NW cite: 658 N.W.2d 731

Listen to recording of oral argument
using RealPlayer Basic,© a free download.

Issues: Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
1. Whether the Appellee ("City") failed to provide requested discovery materials in violation of the Defendant-Appellant's ("Ramstad") due process rights of the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments of the United States Constitution and Article I,  12 of the North Dakota Constitution.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to grant Ramstad any relief pursuant to N.D.R.Crim.P. 16(d)(2), where Ramstad moved to suppress and subsequently moved for a continuance in response to the City's failure to disclose certain documents, the nondisclosure of which affected Ramstad's substantial rights.

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
A. Whether the Appellee (the City) failed to provide requested discovery materials in violation of the Appellant's (Ramstad) due process rights under the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution and Article I,  12 of the North Dakota Constitution.
B. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by failing to grant Ramstad any relief pursuant to N.D.R.Crim.P. 16(d)(2), where Ramstad moved to suppress and subsequently moved for a continuance in response to the City's failure to disclose certain documents, the nondisclosure of which affected Ramstad's substantial rights.

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. The trial court did not commit prejudicial and reversible error when it did not allow an additional jury instruction that Mr. Clark did honestly believe that he had a valid claim to the property.
II. The trial court did not err when it instructed the jury on the elements of Theft of Property Delivered by Mistake.
III. There is sufficient evidence of Mr. Clark's knowledge and intent in the record to support a conviction for the crime of Theft of Property.
IV. The trial court's imposition of a sentence of eight (8) years in prison based on Mr. Clark being a habitual offender was not erroneous or excessive.
V. The trial court did not commit a Brady violation when it admitted marked copes of sales invoices generated by Acme.
Add Docket 20020120 RSS Add Docket 20020120 RSS

Docket entries:
105/20/2002 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 05/15/2002
205/20/2002 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 05/15/2002
305/23/2002 Transcript dated May 14, 2002 (S, Michelle Bredemeier)
405/24/2002 DISK of TRA dated 5-14-02
505/24/2002 RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL (Diane Manthei): 07/04/2002
605/28/2002 Certificate of Service of Copies of Transcript (Michelle Bredemeier)
707/03/2002 TRANSCRIPT DATED May 15, 2002
807/05/2002 DISK - TRA (5-15-02)
907/05/2002 RECORD ON APPEAL (not rec'd: #36 -- Report of Addiction Evaluation)
1007/08/2002 SUPPLEMENTAL CLERK'S CERT. DATED 7-05-02 (Entry Nos. 36 & 39)
1108/12/2002 APPELLANT BRIEF
1208/12/2002 APPELLANT APPENDIX
1308/15/2002 DISK - ATB
1409/12/2002 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF (Faxed letter)
1509/12/2002 ACTION BY CLERK. Granted: 09/14/2002
1609/13/2002 APPELLEE BRIEF
1709/16/2002 DISK - AEB
1809/20/2002 REPLY BRIEF
1909/23/2002 DISK - RYB
2009/26/2002 Ltr. dtd. 9-25-02 from Steven M. Light regarding cites to incorrect page in Reply Brief
2110/31/2002 APPEARANCES: Steven M. Light (Andrea Hall & Jesse Lange, 2d year law students); Gary E. Euren
2210/31/2002 ARGUED: Light; Euren (Vol. Y; Page 50)
2310/31/2002 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
2403/26/2003 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
2503/26/2003 SPLIT OPINION: VandeWalle, Gerald W.
2603/26/2003 (CONCUR Specially): Maring, Mary Muehlen: CONCUR
2703/26/2003 (Join CONCUR Specially): Sandstrom, Dale V.: JN/CON
2803/26/2003 Costs on appeal taxed in favor of appellee
2903/27/2003 Judgment Mailed to Parties
3004/17/2003 MANDATE
3107/28/2008 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed
3204/23/2003 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE
3307/28/2008 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 04/17/2014