Opinions

State v. Lais 2026 ND 12
Docket No.: 20250231
Filing Date: 1/29/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Child Abuse/Child Neglect
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

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

State v. Golberg 2026 ND 11
Docket No.: 20250224
Filing Date: 1/29/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Other
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The Fourth Amendment has drawn a firm line at the entrance to the house. Absent exigent circumstances, that threshold may not reasonably be crossed without a warrant. The location of a home's threshold is not always clear. Police may not enter a private enclosed entrance when there is a more direct alternative access designated for public use. An enclosed area may sometimes be the most direct access to a home's threshold and designated for public use.

Cull v. Cull 2026 ND 10
Docket No.: 20250303
Filing Date: 1/29/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: The use of extended family members for childcare does not amount to a material change in circumstances unless it can be shown the arrangement has a detrimental effect on the children.

A moving party must present competent evidence establishing a causal connection between alleged problems and the other parent's parenting. Merely alleging without support that problems stem from the other parent's parenting style is insufficient to establish a material change of circumstances.

An isolated incident does not automatically mandate a finding of material change in circumstances, even when the incident involves potential endangerment to a child's physical or mental health.

State v. Vasquez 2026 ND 9
Docket No.: 20250314
Filing Date: 1/29/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Rule 11(a)(2), N.D.R.Crim.P., addresses conditional guilty pleas and requires: (1) the defendant, any defendant's attorney, and the prosecuting attorney consent in writing to the conditional plea; (2) the court accept the conditional plea and enter an order; and (3) the judgment specify the plea is conditional.

Temporary remand is warranted for the district court's determination whether the plea was conditional and, if so, entry of an order and judgment consistent with the requirements of N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2).

State v. Olson 2026 ND 8
Docket No.: 20250264
Filing Date: 1/29/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Appellate briefs must include references to the record and must cite to the record showing that issues were preserved for review. This Court will not consider arguments that are not adequately articulated, supported, and briefed, and will not engage in unassisted searches of the record for evidence to support a party's position.

An information may be amended any time before verdict if no additional or different offense is charged. An amendment expanding the date range of an alleged offense does not constitute charging a different or additional offense when the essential elements remain unchanged.

Section 12.1-02-02(2), N.D.C.C., is only applicable to Title 12.1, and the willful culpability level will not be read into other chapters unless the legislature specifically states as such.

State v. Krall 2026 ND 7
Docket No.: 20240233
Filing Date: 1/15/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: In an appeal challenging the sufficiency of the evidence, we look only to the evidence and reasonable inferences most favorable to the verdict to ascertain if there is substantial evidence to warrant the conviction.

A conviction rests upon insufficient evidence only when, after reviewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and giving the prosecution the benefit of all inferences reasonably to be drawn in its favor, no rational fact finder could find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

A conviction may be justified on circumstantial evidence alone if the circumstantial evidence has such probative force as to enable the trier of fact to find the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. A verdict based on circumstantial evidence carries the same presumption of correctness as other verdicts.

Jury instructions are reviewed as a whole to determine if they correctly and adequately inform the jury. Selecting and considering only a part of the instructions is not proper.

An error in a jury instruction provides grounds for reversal only when the instructions as a whole are erroneous, relate to a central subject in the case, and affect the defendant's substantial right.

Ziemann v. Grosz 2026 ND 6
Docket No.: 20250164
Filing Date: 1/15/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The mandate rule, a more specific application of law of the case, requires the district court to follow pronouncements of an appellate court on legal issues in subsequent proceedings of the case and to carry the appellate court's mandate into effect according to its terms.

An appellate court retains authority to decide whether the district court on remand fully carried out terms of its mandate.

Gum v. Muddy Boyz Drywall 2026 ND 5
Docket No.: 20250324
Filing Date: 1/15/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A party does not have a right to appeal if there is no final judgment or proper N.D.R.Civ.P. 54(b) certification.

Weigel, et al. v. Albertson 2026 ND 4
Docket No.: 20250342
Filing Date: 1/15/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: An order from a district court granting a motion to disqualify an attorney is not appealable under N.D.C.C. § 28-27-02(3) or the collateral order doctrine.

Supervisory jurisdiction may be exercised to review an order granting a motion to disqualify an attorney because a civil litigant has a protected interest in counsel of the litigant's choice, and an appeal from a final judgment is not an adequate remedy for erroneous disqualification.

When a district court finds a lawyer-client relationship between an attorney and a company based on objective manifestations, including providing legal advice to the company's officers and employees, the district court does not abuse its discretion in disqualifying the attorney under N.D.R. Prof. Conduct 1.7(a)(1) if the attorney represents clients on both sides of the litigation.

A district court commits legal error by concluding an attorney has a lawyer-client relationship with a company solely because the attorney signed and prosecuted derivative claims brought by a shareholder on behalf of the company.

An error is harmless if it does not affect the outcome of the case or a party's substantial rights.

Rangel v. State 2026 ND 3
Docket No.: 20250281
Filing Date: 1/15/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order granting a motion for summary disposition of postconviction relief applications is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6).