Opinions

State v. Grensteiner 2024 ND 218
Docket No.: 20240101
Filing Date: 12/5/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Probable cause for a driven vehicle extends to a towed vehicle.

Possession may be actual or constructive, exclusive or joint, and may be shown entirely by circumstantial evidence. To prove constructive possession the State must present evidence which establishes that the accused had the power and capability to exercise dominion and control over the contraband.

When there is a claim of prosecutorial misconduct, the Court determines whether the prosecutor's actions were misconduct and, if they were, whether the misconduct had prejudicial effect. Comments intended to highlight the weaknesses of a defendant's case do not shift the burden of proof. The Court presumes that the jury followed the district court's instructions.

State v. Gothberg 2024 ND 217
Docket No.: 20240138
Filing Date: 12/5/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Ordinarily in cases involving consent to enter a home, entry is preceded by an exchange between a police officer and an occupant in which the officer makes an inquiry and in response the occupant verbally or physically reacts in a manner that may be interpreted as consent. Absent verbal consent, the State must show affirmative conduct by the person alleged to have consented that is consistent with the giving of consent, rather than merely showing that the person took no affirmative actions to stop the police.

The existence of consent is a question of fact to be determined from the totality of the circumstances. The scope of an individual's consent is determined by considering what an objectively reasonable person would have understood the consent to include.

Whether consent was voluntarily given considers examination of the totality of the circumstances at the time it was given.

Factors that may be considered in determining the totality of the circumstances are the characteristics and condition of the accused at the time of consent and the details of the setting in which consent was obtained, though no one factor is determinative.

Judicial Conduct Commission v. Hagen 2024 ND 216
Docket No.: 20240282
Filing Date: 11/21/2024
Case Type: Discipline - Judge - Other
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Judge Admonished

Chase v. State 2024 ND 215
Docket No.: 20240024
Filing Date: 11/21/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court order denying an amended application for postconviction relief is affirmed.

The affirmative defenses of res judicata and the statute of limitations are waived by the State when not raised in its answer to an application for postconviction relief.

To trigger the presumption of prejudice arising from improper jury contact, an applicant must first establish that the improper contact actually occurred.

Sanchez v. State 2024 ND 214
Docket No.: 20240173
Filing Date: 11/21/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment denying postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

RMM Properties v. City of Minot 2024 ND 213
Docket No.: 20240130
Filing Date: 11/21/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Zoning
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A court's review is very limited in an appeal from a local governing body's decision. The supreme court's function is to independently determine the propriety of the local governing body's decision, without any special deference to the district court's decision.

The decision of a local governing body must be affirmed unless the local body acted arbitrarily, capriciously or unreasonably, or if there is not substantial evidence supporting the decision.

Chapters 40-39 and 40-50.1, N.D.C.C., are intended to accomplish different tasks, and each provides its own method to protect public rights in streets, alleys, and public grounds. Section 40-39-05, N.D.C.C., applies when a petition seeks only to vacate "public grounds, streets, alleys, or parts thereof." Section 40-50.1-16, N.D.C.C., applies when all owners of lots in a plat seek to vacate the plat or part of the plat containing "public rights in the streets, alleys, easements, and public grounds."

Northstar Center v. Lukenbill Family Partnership, et al. 2024 ND 212
Docket No.: 20240034
Filing Date: 1/24/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Northstar Center v. Lukenbill Family Partnership, et al. 2024 ND 212
Docket No.: 20240034
Filing Date: 2/14/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Summary judgment should not constitute mini-trials of factual issues and is not appropriate when the court must draw inferences or make findings on disputed facts.

The elements of a prima facie case for breach of contract are: (1) the existence of a contract; (2) breach of the contract; and (3) damages which flow from the breach. A breach of contract is the nonperformance of a contractual duty when it is due. While construction of a written contract to determine its legal effect presents a question of law, whether a party has breached a contract is a finding of fact.

An interference with contract claim contemplates a tortfeasor who either prevented a third party from entering into a contract or induced the third party to breach the contract with the plaintiff. To establish a prima facie case for intentional interference with contract, a plaintiff must prove (1) a contract existed, (2) the contract was breached, (3) the defendant instigated the breach, and (4) the defendant instigated the breach without justification.

To prevail on an intentional interference with contract claim, the plaintiff must show the defendant acted intentionally, and the intent required goes beyond the traditional tort concept of intent. The plaintiff must show the defendant specifically intended to interfere with the plaintiff's contractual rights, or acted with knowledge that the interference would result. A party's intent generally presents a question of fact.

An indemnity is a contract by which one engages to save another from a legal consequence of the conduct of one of the parties or of some other person. Indemnification is a remedy which allows a party to recover reimbursement from another for the discharge of a liability which, as between them, should have been discharged by the other.

State v. Villazana 2024 ND 211
Docket No.: 20230307
Filing Date: 11/21/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Under N.D.R.Ev. 404(b), district courts are to apply a three-step analysis to determine whether the evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible: 1) the court must look to the purpose for which the evidence is introduced; 2) the evidence of the prior act or acts must be substantially reliable or clear and convincing; and 3) in criminal cases, there must be proof of the crime charged which permits the trier of fact to establish the defendant's guilt or innocence independently on the evidence presented, without consideration of the evidence of the prior acts.

Under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52, any error, defect, irregularity or variance that does not affect substantial rights must be disregarded. When reviewing a nonconstitutional trial error, the objective is to determine whether the error was so prejudicial that substantial injury occurred and a different decision would have resulted without the error.

Under N.D.R.Ev. 103(a)(1)(B), an objection to the introduction of evidence must state the specific ground of the objection unless it was apparent from the context.

Only issues that have been thoroughly briefed and argued are considered on appeal.

The standard of review for reconciling a jury verdict is whether the verdict is legally inconsistent. Strict standards of logical consistency need not be applied to jury verdicts in criminal cases. Reconciliation of a verdict includes an examination of both the law and the case in order to determine whether the verdict is logical and probable, and therefore consistent, or illogical and clearly contrary to the evidence.

Even if a jury fails to convict a defendant on a charge having a similar element to a charge on which the defendant is convicted, there is no legal inconsistency if there is substantial evidence to support the charge on which he is convicted. 1Jury instructions agreed to by a defendant become the law of the case.

State v. Ford 2024 ND 210
Docket No.: 20240074
Filing Date: 11/21/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: When the record on direct appeal is inadequate to determine whether the defendant received ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant may pursue the ineffectiveness claim at a postconviction proceeding where an adequate record can be made.

A criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7).