Opinions
91 - 100 of 12539 results
|
State v. Bear King
2021 ND 16 Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7). |
|
Interest of A.R.S.
2021 ND 15 Highlight: District court judgment finding children are deprived is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Munzal v. State
2021 ND 14 Highlight: An order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Matter of Didier
2021 ND 13 Highlight: A district court order denying request for discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
R & F Financial Services v. North American Building Solutions, et al.
2021 ND 12
Highlight: All contracts entered into by the parties must be construed together, and only the provisions in the latter contracts which are inconsistent with the prior contracts will supersede. |
|
State v. Casatelli
2021 ND 11
Highlight: A district court’s decision on a motion to suppress will be affirmed if there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the trial court’s findings and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. |
|
Interest of M.M.
2021 ND 10 Highlight: An order terminating mother’s parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Rivera-Rieffel
2021 ND 9 Highlight: Criminal conviction for murder and child abuse is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Young v. Burleigh Morton Detention Center, et al.
2021 ND 8
Highlight: A violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not occur unless the government knowingly intrudes into the attorney-client relationship and the intrusion prejudices the defendant or creates a substantial threat of prejudice.??? |
|
State v. Aune
2021 ND 7 Highlight: A defendant may not challenge a jury verdict as inconsistent based upon an alleged error he invited by requesting an instruction on a lesser included offense. If a defendant does not object to the introduction of prior convictions at sentencing, and the prior convictions were not relied upon to enhance the term of incarceration, the appropriate standard of review is obvious error. It is not error to consider a defendant’s prior convictions as a part of their criminal history under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-04 if there has been no showing that the prior convictions were uncounseled and without proper waiver. |