Opinions

Interest of Hoff 2025 ND 164
Docket No.: 20250016
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An order denying discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is reversed and remanded for further findings. A district court's order finding an individual remains a sexually dangerous individual must contain sufficient and specific factual findings to show the individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior.

State v. Moen 2025 ND 163
Docket No.: 20250018
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The Confrontation Clause provides two protections to criminal defendants: the right to physically face someone who testifies against them, and the right to cross-examine. Although the right to confront witnesses is of a constitutional magnitude, it is not absolute and, in appropriate cases, may bow to accommodate other legitimate interests in the criminal trial process.

North Dakota Century Code § 31-04-04.2 permits remote electronic testimony by children if testifying in front of a criminal defendant would traumatize a child in a manner impacting the child's ability to communicate.

A district court's findings of fact in preliminary proceedings of a criminal case will not be reversed if, after the conflicts in the testimony are resolved in favor of affirmance, there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the court's findings, and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.

State v. Guthmiller 2025 ND 162
Docket No.: 20250085
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: In criminal cases, errors not raised in the district court may be either forfeited errors or waived errors. Forfeiture is the failure to timely assert a right, while waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a right.

Although this Court may review forfeited errors for obvious error, the obvious error analysis under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b) does not apply to waived errors.

Unchallenged jury instructions become the law of the case for purposes of assessing a claim about the sufficiency of the evidence.

Anderson v. Krueger 2025 ND 161
Docket No.: 20250078
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A district court may enter a protection order when there has been a showing of actual or imminent domestic violence. A district court's finding of domestic violence is a finding of fact that will not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous.

Domestic violence protection orders are civil in nature and governed by N.D.C.C. ch. 14-07.1. Criminal justification defenses under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-05-06 do not apply to civil domestic violence protection order proceedings.

Diop v. Altepeter, et al. 2025 ND 160
Docket No.: 20240285
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An appeal from an order finding the appellant in contempt of court in a divorce and parental responsibility action is dismissed as untimely.

Another contempt finding and the first amended judgment appealed in the same matter are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

Duchaine v. State 2025 ND 159
Docket No.: 20250118
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

State v. Pittsley 2025 ND 158
Docket No.: 20250009
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Child Abuse/Child Neglect
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury found the defendant guilty of child neglect is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Interest of K.I.B. 2025 ND 157
Docket No.: 20250060
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Delinquency
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: The State is an aggrieved party under N.D.C.C. § 27-20.2-26 and may appeal a juvenile court's ruling exempting a juvenile adjudicated delinquent as a sexual offender from registration as a sexual offender.

This Court reviews a juvenile court's interpretation of a statute de novo. When interpreting a statute, the primary goal is to determine the intent of the statute by looking to the statute's language as a whole and giving meaning and effect to every word, phrase, and sentence.

Section 12.1-32-15(2), N.D.C.C., does not allow the court to deviate from the sexual offender registration requirement for juveniles adjudicated delinquent under N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-27.2.

Section 29-28-35, N.D.C.C., does not apply to appeals of juvenile cases because the Juvenile Court Act controls procedure in juvenile cases.

Goolsby v. Crosby 2025 ND 156
Docket No.: 20250194
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying a petition for a disorderly conduct restraining order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Kraft v. State 2025 ND 155
Docket No.: 20250180
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A motion to summarily dismiss an application for postconviction relief under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09 is analogous to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). When the State moves for summary dismissal, the motion is treated like a N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b) motion subject to the response times in N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a), which is 14 days.

A motion for summary disposition under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09.1 is analogous to and governed by the procedure for a motion for summary judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 56. When the State moves for summary disposition, the motion is treated as a N.D.R.Civ.P. 56 motion for summary judgment, which gives the petitioner thirty days to respond.