Opinions

State v. Dearinger 2022 ND 132
Docket No.: 20210295
Filing Date: 6/23/2022
Case Type: MISC. STATUTORY OFFENSE (FELONY)
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: The probable cause showing required at a preliminary hearing is a minimal burden of proof.

The felony enhancement of hindering law enforcement under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-08-03(2)(a) requires the State to establish probable cause to believe a person knew of conduct of another and the known conduct constituted a class AA, A or B felony.

Interest of A.P. 2022 ND 131
Docket No.: 20220129
Filing Date: 6/23/2022
Case Type: TERMINATION/PARENTAL RIGHTS
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Juvenile court orders terminating parental rights are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

State v. Johansen 2022 ND 130
Docket No.: 20220046
Filing Date: 6/23/2022
Case Type: MISC. STATUTORY OFF. (MISDEMEANOR)
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after the trial court found the defendant guilty of disorderly conduct is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

State v. Taylor 2022 ND 129
Docket No.: 20220038
Filing Date: 6/23/2022
Case Type: THEFT
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Except for a clerical error, an amended criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4), and remanded to correct the error.

State v. Pulkrabek 2022 ND 128
Docket No.: 20210332
Filing Date: 6/8/2022
Case Type: MISC. STATUTORY OFFENSE (FELONY)
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: When the defendant does not raise a public challenge to any of the violations he asserts on appeal, this Court concludes any potential error should be treated as a forfeited error, subject to a review as an obvious error under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b).

Closures of pretrial hearings implicate the public trial right.

When the district court makes no Waller findings, there is a violation of the Sixth Amendment right to a public trial constituting obvious error.

Given our case law strictly requiring analysis of the Waller factors, we must reverse for a new trial to ensure the fairness, integrity, and public reputation of the justice system.

Interest of A.G. 2022 ND 127
Docket No.: 20210345
Filing Date: 6/8/2022
Case Type: JUVENILE LAW
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A juvenile court order finding two children to be in need of protection is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

State v. Thomas 2022 ND 126
Docket No.: 20210339
Filing Date: 6/8/2022
Case Type: THEFT
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald W.

Highlight: A district court has broad discretion in admitting or excluding evidence at trial.

In deciding whether to exclude evidence under N.D.R.Ev. 403, courts should give the evidence its maximum reasonable probative force and its minimum reasonable prejudicial value.

Failure to assert a claim of obvious error on appeal does not warrant review under the obvious error standard.

State v. Bradshaw 2022 ND 125
Docket No.: 20210306
Filing Date: 6/8/2022
Case Type: SEXUAL OFFENSE
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald W.

Highlight: An issue not properly preserved for appeal is limited to whether the alleged error constitutes obvious error affecting substantial rights.

A substantial right has not been denied unless the violation significantly prejudiced the defendant.

Defendant failed to show how he was significantly prejudiced by the late disclosure or admission of a redacted video.

Quamme v. Quamme 2022 ND 124
Docket No.: 20220034
Filing Date: 6/8/2022
Case Type: DIVORCE/PROPERTY DIV./ALIMONY
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An appellate court’s jurisdiction generally attaches upon the filing of a notice of appeal and is not relinquished until the court issues its mandate.

An order or judgment entered by the district court without jurisdiction is void.

Interest of A.C. 2022 ND 123
Docket No.: 20220081
Filing Date: 6/8/2022
Case Type: TERMINATION/PARENTAL RIGHTS
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: While this Court defers to a tribe on its membership determinations, without consistent and clear factual findings supporting the application of ICWA and North Dakota heightened review for Indian families, this Court is unable to determine the father’s issues on appeal.

The Court retains jurisdiction and remands for the juvenile court to clarify its findings on ICWA and heightened state law and to hold additional evidentiary proceedings if necessary.