Interest of Buller
- In the Interest of David Buller
Anna A. Argenti, Assistant State's Attorney, Petitioner and Appellee
David Buller, Respondent and Appellant
- Case Type
- CIVIL APPEAL : CIVIL COMMIT OF SEXUAL PREDATOR
- Appeal From
Case No. 2020-MH-00024
South Central Judicial District, Burleigh County
Douglas Alan Bahr
Parties' Statement of Issues
1. Was the second Petition for Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual, dated March 6, 2020 precluded by the doctrine of res judicata?
2. Was the May 26, 2020 Order Granting Petition supported by clear and convincing evidence?
David Buller appeals from a district court order granting a petition for commitment of a sexually dangerous individual.
In January 2020, the State filed a petition for commitment of a sexually dangerous individual against Buller. After a preliminary hearing, the district court entered an order of dismissal of the State’s petition on January 28, 2020. Two days later, on January 30, 2020, the court entered an order vacating its previous order of dismissal and found probable cause existed. Buller filed a writ of mandamus to this Court challenging the January 30, 2020 order. Due to its procedural irregularity, this Court vacated the district court’s January 30, 2020 order without prejudice.
In March 2020, the State filed a new petition for commitment of a sexually dangerous individual against Buller. The district court granted the State’s petition.
On appeal, Buller argues the State’s second petition for commitment of a sexually dangerous individual was barred by res judicata because the January 28, 2020 order of dismissal was the final order on the merits once this Court vacated the January 30, 2020 order. Buller also argues the court’s order granting the second petition was not supported by clear and convincing evidence.
(Note: Attachments may not be available for recently filed cases and/or confidential documents.)
|Seq. #||Filing Date||Description||Attachment|
|1||06/18/2020||NOTICE OF APPEAL : 06/18/2020|
|2||06/18/2020||ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT : 06/19/2020|
|3||06/19/2020||NOT. OF FILING NOT. OF APPEAL AND PROOF OF SERV.|
|4||06/19/2020||Notice served on Kent M. Morrow and Karlei K. Neufeld|
|5||07/13/2020||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED JANUARY 28, 2020|
|6||07/13/2020||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED MARCH 11, 2020|
|7||07/13/2020||CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE TRANSCRIPTS|
|8||07/14/2020||ELEC. RECORD ON APPEAL DATED JULY 13, 2020 (ENTRY NOS. 2-51)|
|9||08/14/2020||ELECTRONIC TRANSCRIPT DATED MAY 6, 2020|
|12||09/17/2020||Oral Argument Request by Appellant|
|14||09/21/2020||Rec'd $10.50 for 21 pages over 100 in Appendix (receipt #27829)|
|15||09/21/2020||Rec'd non-substantive corrections to ATB|
|16||09/23/2020||Rec'd 5 copies of ATB and 4 copies of ATA back from CD|
|19||10/20/2020||Rec'd copies of AEB & AEA from Central Duplicating|
|20||10/22/2020||NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|21||10/27/2020||REQUEST TO WAIVE ORAL ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF APPELLANT|
|22||10/27/2020||ACTION BY SUPREME COURT - Granted|
|23||11/17/2020||REQUEST TO WAIVE ORAL ARGUMENT ON BEHALF OF APPELLEE|
|24||11/17/2020||ACTION BY SUPREME COURT - Granted|