State v. Frankfurth

20050112 State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellant
v.
Paul R. Frankfurth, Defendant and Appellee

Appeal from: District Court, South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
Judge Donald L. Jorgensen
Nature of Action: Sexual Offense
Counsel:
Appellant: Cynthia Mae Feland , Asst. State's Attorney
Appellee: Thomas M. Tuntland
Term: 09/2005   Argument: 09/01/2005  2:45pm
ND cite: 2005 ND 167
NW cite: 704 N.W.2d 564

Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format

Issues: Appellant's Statement of the Issues:
I. The appeal is authorized by statute.
II. The Criminal Information sufficiently advised Frankfurth of the charges against him.
III. If the Criminal Information was defective, setting aside the jury verdict and dismissing the information was not the appropriate remedy.
A. Contrary to Frankfurth's assertions in the motion to arrest judgment, failure to charge a crime does not deprive the court of jurisdiction.
B. The trial court failed to distinguish between pre-trial and post-trial objections to a criminal information.
C. Cases that have required dismissal due to a missing element in the charging document are based on the Fifth Amendment's indictment clause, which does not apply in a state court criminal prosecution.
IV. Applying the four-prong test set forth in U.S. v. Cotton, dismissal of the Information was improper.

Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES. I. Did the Trial Court err in arresting judgment in this action when the Information failed to charge one of the essential elements of the offense of gross sexual imposition?

Add Docket 20050112 RSS Add Docket 20050112 RSS

Docket entries:
103/31/2005 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 03/24/2005
203/31/2005 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 03/24/2005
304/07/2005 TRANSCRIPT DATED 1-18-05
404/07/2005 DISK - TRA dated 1-18-05
504/21/2005 MOTION TO DISMISS (due by 4 p.m. on 5-2-05). RspDue: 05/02/2005
604/22/2005 RECORD ON APPEAL (Not Rec'd: #45--court reporter notes)
704/28/2005 Response to Motion to Dismiss
805/04/2005 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Motion to Dismiss). Denied
905/04/2005 Order Mailed to Parties
1005/13/2005 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF
1105/13/2005 ACTION BY CLERK (MAT). Granted: 05/27/2005
1205/27/2005 APPELLANT BRIEF
1305/27/2005 APPELLANT APPENDIX
1406/01/2005 8 cc of noa for ata
1506/28/2005 Corrected P. 1 (Statement of the Issues)for ATB
1606/28/2005 DISK - atb (e-mailed)
1706/28/2005 APPELLEE BRIEF
1806/29/2005 DISK - AEB
1909/01/2005 APPEARANCES: Cynthia M. Feland; Thomas M. Tuntland
2009/01/2005 ARGUED: Feland; Tuntland
2109/01/2005 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST
2209/27/2005 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED
2309/27/2005 SPLIT OPINION: Crothers, Daniel John
2409/27/2005 (CONCURRING): Kapsner, Carol Ronning: CONCUR
2509/27/2005 Judgment Mailed to Parties
2610/25/2005 MANDATE
2710/27/2005 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE
2811/01/2012 EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed

Generated from Supreme Court Docket on 11/24/2014