State v. Brown
- State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
Lori Lee Brown, Defendant and Appellant
- Case Type
- CRIMINAL APPEAL : VIOLATION OF CITY ORDINANCE
- Appeal From
Case No. 07-K-05124
East Central Judicial District, Cass County
Douglas R. Herman
The legislature may delegate legislative powers, including the authority to create criminal penalties for violations of county ordinances, to a home rule county.
The provision in N.D.C.C. 11-09.1-05(5) limiting a home rule county's authority to regulate any industry or activity already regulated by state law applies only when there is an explicit state law or rule restraining the county's authority or when the industry or activity involved is already subject to substantial state control through broad, encompassing statutes or rules.
A county ordinance declaring that a dog that barks in an excessive or continuous manner is a public nuisance and that a person who owns or harbors the dog is guilty of an infraction does not reach a substantial amount of constitutionally protected conduct and is not unconstitutionally overbroad.
An ordinance declaring that a dog that barks in an excessive or continuous manner is a public nuisance is not unconstitutionally vague.
Under N.D. Const. art. VI, sec. 3, a procedural rule adopted by the Supreme Court must prevail in a conflict with a statutory procedural rule.
The signature of the prosecuting attorney on an information is not required to be sworn to upon oath.
A defendant charged with an infraction for violating a county ordinance, with a maximum penalty of a fifty-dollar fine with no possibility of imprisonment, does not have a constitutional right to a jury trial under N.D. Const. art. I, sec. 13.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||10/13/2008||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 10/10/2008|
|2||10/13/2008||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 10/10/2008|
|3||11/10/2008||RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL : 11/29/2008|
|4||11/25/2008||TRANSCRIPTS DATED 1/3/08, 3/25/08, 6/17/08, 9/9/08, 9/22/08.|
|5||11/25/2008||DISK - tra dated 1/3/08; 3/25/08; 6/17/08; 9/9/08; 9/22/08 (by email)|
|6||11/26/2008||RECORD ON APPEAL (not rec'd-entries 2, 25, 35 (tapes))|
|7||12/09/2008||Clerk's Supplemental Certificate of Record dated December 8, 2008 (entry nos. 51 & 52).|
|8||12/31/2008||Clerk's Supplemental Certificate of Record dated December 8, 2008 (Entry Nos. 54 - 56)|
|9||12/31/2008||Amended Notice of Appeal|
|11||01/05/2009||attached Addendum to Appellant's Brief|
|13||01/06/2009||Affidavit of Service by Mail of Appellant's Brief|
|14||01/06/2009||DISK - ATB|
|15||01/28/2009||MOTION FOR Filing of Amicus Curiae Brief|
|16||01/28/2009||ACTION BY ACTING CHIEF JUSTICE|
|17||01/28/2009||AMICUS CURIAE BRIEF - on behalf of Attorney General of State of N.D.||View|
|18||01/28/2009||DISK of ACB - e-mailed|
|19||01/30/2009||MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLEE BRIEF|
|20||01/30/2009||E-FILED MOTION - MAE|
|21||01/30/2009||ACTION BY CLERK - Granted : 02/18/2009|
|22||02/12/2009||APPELLEE BRIEF (e-filed)||View|
|23||02/12/2009||E-FILED BRIEF (AEB)|
|24||02/13/2009||Letter from Charles J. Sheeley dated 2-12-09 RE: Consent to appearance of 3rd Yr. Law Student|
|26||02/19/2009||Affidavit of Service by Mail for AEB|
|27||02/19/2009||Received $25 surcharge for AEB (Receipt #18733).|
|28||02/20/2009||Received 7 copies of AEB from Central Duplicating.|
|30||03/02/2009||ADDENDUM TO REPLY BRIEF|
|31||03/03/2009||DISK - RYB|
|32||03/18/2009||APPEARANCES: Jonathan T. Garaas; Charles J. Sheeley, Asst. Attorney General|
|33||03/18/2009||ARGUED: Garaas; Sheeley|
|34||03/18/2009||ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|36||08/18/2009||UNANIMOUS OPINION : Kapsner, Carol Ronning||View|
|37||08/19/2009||Judgment e-mailed to Parties|
|38||08/31/2009||PETITION FOR REHEARING||View|
|39||08/31/2009||DISK - per (C-D Rom)|
|40||09/16/2009||ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (Pet/Rehearing) - Denied|
|42||10/07/2009||RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|
|43||10/13/2020||EXPUNGED - Nonpermanent record items destroyed|