Opinions

State v. Graff 2024 ND 220
Docket No.: 20230409
Filing Date: 12/5/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An order dismissing the matter without prejudice following a finding of prosecutorial misconduct is affirmed.

Although the district court has some supervisory control over dismissals, the court should not dismiss a case with prejudice unless the court has had an opportunity to determine issues of bad faith, harassment, or misconduct, and this finding must be supported by clear and convincing evidence.

Generally, dismissal with prejudice is a remedy that should only be used in extreme circumstances.

State v. Thesing 2024 ND 219
Docket No.: 20240093
Filing Date: 12/5/2024
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Section 12.1-31.2-02, N.D.C.C., permits an individual to be charged for violating a pre-dispositional order when the alleged violation occurs while the individual is in custody.

A pre-dispositional order issued under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-31.2-02(1) differs from a condition of release issued under N.D.R.Crim.P. 46(a)(2)(E).

An argument not adequately articulated, supported, and briefed will not be considered by this Court.

State v. Grensteiner 2024 ND 218
Docket No.: 20240100
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. 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: 11/21/2024
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.