Anderson v. Lamm2023 ND 249 Docket No.: 20230301 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: OTHER (Civil) Author: Crothers, Daniel John
Highlight:The Court does not issue advisory opinions and will ordinarily dismiss a moot appeal. An appeal is moot when there is no actual controversy left to be determined because events have occurred that make it impossible for the Court to issue relief. There is an exception to the rule against advisory opinions for appeals from district court decisions that continue to have adverse collateral consequences for an appellant. For the collateral consequences exception to apply, there must be a reasonable possibility that collateral consequences will occur. This requires an examination of the specific circumstances of a case.
The issuance of a disorderly conduct restraining order without evidence to support a finding that a respondent engaged in disorderly conduct amounts to an abuse of discretion.
Mead v. Hatzenbeller2023 ND 248 Docket No.: 20230185 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: OTHER (Civil) Author: Crothers, Daniel John
Highlight:A temporary restraining order is a type of injunction that is brief in duration and meant to maintain the status quo until the district court can make a determination on the merits of a petition. After a final order has been issued, questions concerning the propriety of earlier temporary injunctive orders are moot.
Disorderly conduct is analyzed in the same manner for both civil and criminal cases because the reasonable grounds for a restraining order are synonymous with probable cause for an arrest. The elements of criminal disorderly conduct by harassment are the same as those required to prove disorderly conduct in the context of a petition for a restraining order.
A petitioner for a disorderly conduct restraining order must prove his case before the district court in a full hearing. Because a restraining order constrains a person’s liberty and entails certain stigma, a respondent has a due process right to a fair hearing, including reasonable notice or opportunity to know of the claims of opposing parties, along with the opportunity to rebut those claims.
The purpose of an appeal is to review the actions of the trial court, not to grant the appellant an opportunity to develop and expound upon new strategies or theories. Issues or contentions not raised in the district court cannot be raised for the first time on appeal.
Koon v. State2023 ND 247 Docket No.: 20230139 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF Author: Tufte, Jerod E.
Highlight:A district court judgment denying an application for postconviction relief is affirmed.
The district court did not err by considering evidence outside the record when it followed the procedure of Rule 201, N.D.R.Ev., providing notice to the parties of its intent to judicially notice the clerk’s trial notes before declining to take judicial notice of the clerk’s notes.
The district court’s mere exposure to inadmissible evidence is not error because we presume the court considers only admissible evidence. We have consistently acknowledged a judge is capable of distinguishing between admissible and inadmissible evidence when deliberating the ultimate question.
State v. Nelson2023 ND 246 Docket No.: 20230234 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: MISC. STATUTORY OFFENSE (FELONY) Author: Jensen, Jon J.
Highlight:This Court’s review of a sentence is generally confined to whether the district court acted within the statutory sentencing limits or substantially relied on an impermissible factor.
This Court does not consider arguments that are not adequately articulated, supported, and briefed.
State v. Gai2023 ND 245 Docket No.: 20230231 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: DUI/DUS Author: Per Curiam
Highlight:A criminal judgment revoking probation and resentencing a defendant is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).
Heywood v. State2023 ND 244 Docket No.: 20230223 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF Author: Per Curiam
Highlight:A district court order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
Everett v. State2023 ND 243 Docket No.: 20230192 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF Author: Crothers, Daniel John
Highlight:An applicant for post-conviction relief has two years from when the conviction becomes final to apply for relief, unless newly discovered evidence is found.
Newly discovered evidence for purposes of post-conviction relief must establish that the applicant did not engage in conduct leading to the underlying conviction.
Gaede v. State2023 ND 242 Docket No.: 20230269 Filing Date: 12/28/2023 Case Type: POST-CONVICTION RELIEF Author: Per Curiam
Highlight:An order denying a petition for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6).
