Opinions

State v. Cotton 2025 ND 191
Docket No.: 20250153
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: District courts have discretion to issue consecutive terms of imprisonment for felonies, but N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-11 limits the court's authority for misdemeanors. When sentenced only for misdemeanors, a defendant may not be consecutively sentenced to more than one year, unless the defendant is being sentenced for two or more class A misdemeanors and each was committed as part of a different course of conduct or each involved a substantially different criminal objective. Crimes are not necessarily part of the same course of conduct simply because they were committed close in time or by similar means.

State v. Cotton 2025 ND 191
Docket No.: 20250154
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: District courts have discretion to issue consecutive terms of imprisonment for felonies, but N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-11 limits the court's authority for misdemeanors. When sentenced only for misdemeanors, a defendant may not be consecutively sentenced to more than one year, unless the defendant is being sentenced for two or more class A misdemeanors and each was committed as part of a different course of conduct or each involved a substantially different criminal objective. Crimes are not necessarily part of the same course of conduct simply because they were committed close in time or by similar means.

State v. Cotton 2025 ND 191
Docket No.: 20250155
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: District courts have discretion to issue consecutive terms of imprisonment for felonies, but N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-11 limits the court's authority for misdemeanors. When sentenced only for misdemeanors, a defendant may not be consecutively sentenced to more than one year, unless the defendant is being sentenced for two or more class A misdemeanors and each was committed as part of a different course of conduct or each involved a substantially different criminal objective. Crimes are not necessarily part of the same course of conduct simply because they were committed close in time or by similar means.

State v. Wallette 2025 ND 190
Docket No.: 20250073
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The Eighth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article I, § 11 of the North Dakota Constitution respectively prohibit infliction of "cruel and unusual punishments" and "cruel or unusual punishments." A punishment in a non-capital case that is grossly disproportionate to the offense is cruel and unusual. The disproportionality principle is narrow. It forbids only extreme sentences.

Generally, unless there is a statute to the contrary, it is within the trial court's sound discretion whether a sentence should run concurrently with or consecutively to another sentence.

The Court will review a claim that a sentence is illegal even when it was not raised below, but a significant distinction exists between claims of error regarding a sentence imposed in a procedurally or factually flawed manner, which can be waived, from an unauthorized sentence that could not lawfully be imposed under any circumstances in the particular case.

Smith v. State 2025 ND 189
Docket No.: 20250127
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An attorney's representation of a criminal defendant fell below an objective
standard of reasonableness when the attorney failed to exclude certain evidence
under N.D.R.Ev. 404(b) prior to trial, failed to object to the evidence at trial, failed
to request a limiting or curative instruction after the evidence was introduced,
and failed to develop an obvious error argument regarding the evidence on
direct appeal.

The district court erred in concluding a criminal defendant was prejudiced by
counsel's representation without first assessing counsel's errors within the
context of the remaining evidence properly presented and the overall conduct of
the trial to determine whether there was a reasonable probability that the
outcome of the proceeding would have been different.

The case is remanded to supplement the record with additional evidence from
the original record, if possible, and to permit the district court to address all of
the grounds for relief raised by the applicant in his postconviction proceeding.

State v. Miller 2025 ND 188
Docket No.: 20250174
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Orders revoking probation and resentencing defendant for aggravated assault and violations of a domestic violence protection order are affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

In probation revocation proceedings, a district court need not make factual findings explaining its decision to revoke probation and sentence incarceration instead of alternative sanctions. On appeal, a party may not challenge an order or judgment not designated in the notice of appeal. A party may not collaterally attack a final decision, that was not appealed, in subsequent proceedings.

State v. Miller 2025 ND 188
Docket No.: 20250175
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Orders revoking probation and resentencing defendant for aggravated assault and violations of a domestic violence protection order are affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded.

In probation revocation proceedings, a district court need not make factual findings explaining its decision to revoke probation and sentence incarceration instead of alternative sanctions. On appeal, a party may not challenge an order or judgment not designated in the notice of appeal. A party may not collaterally attack a final decision, that was not appealed, in subsequent proceedings.

Overton v. Overton 2025 ND 187
Docket No.: 20250189
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Procedural due process does not require the district court to ensure incarcerated parties to civil litigation are present at hearings.

A hearing for a domestic violence protection order does not implicate confrontation clause rights protected by the Sixth Amendment.

State v. Barrett 2025 ND 186
Docket No.: 20250114
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A jury's question or request to view evidence during deliberations shall take place in open court, unless the defendant agrees otherwise.

For a closure of the courtroom to comply with the constitution, the district court must make correct and adequate findings on the closure.

A violation of the constitutional right to a public trial can seriously affect the fairness, integrity, or public reputation of judicial proceedings, warranting reversal.

State v. Watterud 2025 ND 185
Docket No.: 20250082
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A victim's testimony about misconduct occurring over several years can be sufficient to support a conviction.

An improper communication to a jury in deliberations must actually prejudice the defendant to warrant a reversal of a conviction.

McMahon v. Sanford, et al. 2025 ND 184
Docket No.: 20250100
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A professional negligence action against a physician, nurse, or hospital generally requires an expert affidavit. Generally, decisions to provide medication, refuse to provide medication, or discharge a patient are medical decisions requiring the expertise of medical professionals.

In an "obvious occurrence" case, expert testimony is unnecessary if a layperson can find negligence without the benefit of an expert opinion. Determining whether to discharge a patient or provide pain medication requires medical expertise beyond the common understanding of a layperson.

The tort of intentional infliction of emotional distress requires (1) extreme and outrageous conduct that is (2) intentional or reckless and that causes (3) severe emotional distress. The district court must first determine if, as a matter of law, the defendant's conduct is sufficiently extreme and outrageous to permit recovery. This standard is strenuously high and requires conduct beyond all possible bounds of decency. The liability clearly does not extend to mere insults, indignities, threats, annoyances, petty oppressions, or other trivialities.

State v. Weber 2025 ND 183
Docket No.: 20250098
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A party bears the burden to correctly label its motion as to inform the court of the relief sought. The district court did not err when it treated appellant's motion as a request for relief under N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(a) based on its label.

An as-applied challenge to probation conditions is not ripe for review when the individual subject to the probation conditions is still incarcerated.

This Court declines to address a facial challenge to the constitutionality of a statute without the benefit of adversarial briefing.

State v. Wilson 2025 ND 182
Docket No.: 20250169
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A probationer's right to counsel does not arise from the Sixth Amendment but rather from North Dakota Rule of Criminal Procedure 32(f)(3)(A)(iii). Because of the statutory origin of a probationer's right to counsel at a revocation hearing, the full panoply of rights due a defendant in a criminal proceeding does not apply.

On review of a district court's finding that a probationer voluntarily, knowingly, and intelligently waived the right to counsel, we apply a clearly erroneous standard.

Interest of M.P. 2025 ND 181
Docket No.: 20250320
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The juvenile court's orders terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of A.P. 2025 ND 181
Docket No.: 20250321
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The juvenile court's orders terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of C.P. 2025 ND 181
Docket No.: 20250322
Filing Date: 11/5/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: The juvenile court's orders terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Heisler v. Reiger, et al. 2025 ND 180
Docket No.: 20250133
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A post-trial motion invoking both N.D.R.Civ.P. 59 and N.D.R.Civ.P. 60(b) extends the time to file an appeal until notice of entry of the order disposing of the motion when the motion is brought within the time limits set forth in N.D.R.Civ.P. 59(c)(2) and N.D.R.App.P. 4(a)(3).

The 60-day period for filing an appeal under N.D.R.App.P. 4(a)(1) starts to run in the absence of a notice of entry of the judgment or order only when the record clearly shows the appealing party had actual knowledge of the judgment or order, as evidenced by some affirmative action taken by the appealing party that shows actual knowledge.

The email notice the clerk of district court provides the parties pursuant to N.D.R.Ct. 3.5(e)(5) does not equate to actual notice that will start the 60-day period for filing an appeal in the absence of a notice of entry of the judgment or order.

The judgment of the district court in favor of the appellee is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Eggl v. State 2025 ND 179
Docket No.: 20250183
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Trial counsel did not render ineffective assistance of counsel when his client chose to enter an open plea rather than accept the State's plea offer where counsel provided his client the options on how to proceed, explained the strengths and weaknesses of the case, and left the final decision on how to proceed to his client.

State v. Chambers 2025 ND 178
Docket No.: 20250108
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Attempted Murder
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: A criminal defendant failed to show his substantial rights were prejudiced by the potential ambiguity of pleading guilty to both a cognizable offense and a non-cognizable offense where there was a sufficient factual basis to support the guilty plea to the cognizable offense. The requirements of N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(c)(3)(B) did not apply where the criminal defendant entered an open plea rather than pleading guilty under a plea agreement in which the parties presented a joint recommendation on a proposed sentence.

Schultz v. Schultz 2025 ND 177
Docket No.: 20250156
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court divorce judgment awarding equal residential responsibility and distributing the marital estate is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Hernandez v. State 2025 ND 176
Docket No.: 20250116
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order dismissing an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(6).

Corey v. Kenneh 2025 ND 175
Docket No.: 20250239
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: A disorderly conduct restraining order is affirmed.

An appeal is not moot if a district court order has collateral consequences for the appealing party.

Citations to non-existent case law may preclude review of issues on appeal.

It is the appellant's responsibility to obtain a transcript and they must bear any consequences for failing to provide a transcript on appeal.

State v. King 2025 ND 174
Docket No.: 20250101
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Terrorizing
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Obvious error analysis requires consideration whether the district court clearly deviated from applicable current law.

An alleged error that is not plain will not be analyzed further in accordance with judicial restraint and constitutional avoidance.

Olson v. Olson, et al. 2025 ND 173
Docket No.: 20250120
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Certified Question - Civil - Civil
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Certified questions from our state district courts have a more stringent standard than foreign courts, requiring the question to be determinative, because the parties have a right to appeal.

The district court's certified question of law is not answered because the question is not dispositive of the issues before that court and our response would be purely advisory

State v. Santiago Agosto 2025 ND 172
Docket No.: 20250135
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court criminal judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Interest of Skorick 2025 ND 171
Docket No.: 20250071
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A district court must have sufficient factual findings to show a sexually dangerous individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Past conduct is relevant and may be considered with present conduct to determine if an individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Failure to attend treatment might demonstrate inability to control behavior just as violation of other institutional rules.

Williamson v. Williamson 2025 ND 170
Docket No.: 20250007
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court's judgment of divorce, order denying reconsideration, and order awarding attorney's fees is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (4), and (6).

Thompson v. City of Adams, et al. 2025 ND 169
Docket No.: 20250185
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court judgment granting summary judgment is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(8).

Cache Private Capital Diversified Fund v. Braddock, et al. 2025 ND 168
Docket No.: 20250176
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Eviction
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Valid service of process is necessary to assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Once a prima facie showing of valid service has been presented, the burden shifts to the defendant to present facts and documentation to establish service of process was insufficient.

Eviction actions are not joinable with other actions, and counterclaims and defenses may not be interposed except as a setoff to a demand made for damages, rents, or profits.

A contract for deed may be canceled by statutory cancellation. By following the statutes' strict guidelines, a vendor cancels the contract for deed by operation of law. Upon cancellation, the vendee's interest in the property terminates, and the vendee is required to return possession of the property to the vendor. If the vendee fails to return possession of the property, the vendee is in wrongful possession of the property, and an eviction is proper.

Cache Private Capital Diversified Fund v. Braddock, et al. 2025 ND 168
Docket No.: 20250177
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Eviction
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: Valid service of process is necessary to assert personal jurisdiction over a defendant. Once a prima facie showing of valid service has been presented, the burden shifts to the defendant to present facts and documentation to establish service of process was insufficient.

Eviction actions are not joinable with other actions, and counterclaims and defenses may not be interposed except as a setoff to a demand made for damages, rents, or profits.

A contract for deed may be canceled by statutory cancellation. By following the statutes' strict guidelines, a vendor cancels the contract for deed by operation of law. Upon cancellation, the vendee's interest in the property terminates, and the vendee is required to return possession of the property to the vendor. If the vendee fails to return possession of the property, the vendee is in wrongful possession of the property, and an eviction is proper.

State v. Jemal 2025 ND 167
Docket No.: 20250222
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: In probation revocation proceedings, a district court need not make factual findings to support its decision to revoke probation instead of choosing alternative sanctions.

Appellate review of sentencing decisions is limited to determining whether the sentence is within the statutory range and whether the court considered impermissible factors.

A party may not challenge an order or judgment on appeal without designating it in a notice of appeal.

Sutherby v. Astanina, et al. 2025 ND 166
Docket No.: 20250132
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court must credit a noncustodial parent for voluntary child support payments made during the pendency of an action when calculating past-due support obligations. When a court orders child support with a retroactive effective date, it must offset any past-due support owed by payments the noncustodial parent made to the custodial parent for the children's benefit during the relevant period.

Rugland v. State 2025 ND 165
Docket No.: 20250117
Filing Date: 10/22/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying a postconviction relief application is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Interest of Hoff 2025 ND 164
Docket No.: 20250016
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Civil Commitment of Sexually Dangerous Individual
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: An order denying discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is reversed and remanded for further findings. A district court's order finding an individual remains a sexually dangerous individual must contain sufficient and specific factual findings to show the individual has serious difficulty controlling his behavior.

State v. Moen 2025 ND 163
Docket No.: 20250018
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: The Confrontation Clause provides two protections to criminal defendants: the right to physically face someone who testifies against them, and the right to cross-examine. Although the right to confront witnesses is of a constitutional magnitude, it is not absolute and, in appropriate cases, may bow to accommodate other legitimate interests in the criminal trial process.

North Dakota Century Code § 31-04-04.2 permits remote electronic testimony by children if testifying in front of a criminal defendant would traumatize a child in a manner impacting the child's ability to communicate.

A district court's findings of fact in preliminary proceedings of a criminal case will not be reversed if, after the conflicts in the testimony are resolved in favor of affirmance, there is sufficient competent evidence fairly capable of supporting the court's findings, and the decision is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence.

State v. Guthmiller 2025 ND 162
Docket No.: 20250085
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: In criminal cases, errors not raised in the district court may be either forfeited errors or waived errors. Forfeiture is the failure to timely assert a right, while waiver is the intentional relinquishment of a right.

Although this Court may review forfeited errors for obvious error, the obvious error analysis under N.D.R.Crim.P. 52(b) does not apply to waived errors.

Unchallenged jury instructions become the law of the case for purposes of assessing a claim about the sufficiency of the evidence.

Anderson v. Krueger 2025 ND 161
Docket No.: 20250078
Filing Date: 10/9/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A district court may enter a protection order when there has been a showing of actual or imminent domestic violence. A district court's finding of domestic violence is a finding of fact that will not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous.

Domestic violence protection orders are civil in nature and governed by N.D.C.C. ch. 14-07.1. Criminal justification defenses under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-05-06 do not apply to civil domestic violence protection order proceedings.

Diop v. Altepeter, et al. 2025 ND 160
Docket No.: 20240285
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Parenting Responsibility
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An appeal from an order finding the appellant in contempt of court in a divorce and parental responsibility action is dismissed as untimely.

Another contempt finding and the first amended judgment appealed in the same matter are summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7).

Duchaine v. State 2025 ND 159
Docket No.: 20250118
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(7).

State v. Pittsley 2025 ND 158
Docket No.: 20250009
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Child Abuse/Child Neglect
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A criminal judgment entered after a jury found the defendant guilty of child neglect is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3).

Interest of K.I.B. 2025 ND 157
Docket No.: 20250060
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Delinquency
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: The State is an aggrieved party under N.D.C.C. § 27-20.2-26 and may appeal a juvenile court's ruling exempting a juvenile adjudicated delinquent as a sexual offender from registration as a sexual offender.

This Court reviews a juvenile court's interpretation of a statute de novo. When interpreting a statute, the primary goal is to determine the intent of the statute by looking to the statute's language as a whole and giving meaning and effect to every word, phrase, and sentence.

Section 12.1-32-15(2), N.D.C.C., does not allow the court to deviate from the sexual offender registration requirement for juveniles adjudicated delinquent under N.D.C.C. ch. 12.1-27.2.

Section 29-28-35, N.D.C.C., does not apply to appeals of juvenile cases because the Juvenile Court Act controls procedure in juvenile cases.

Goolsby v. Crosby 2025 ND 156
Docket No.: 20250194
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Protection/Restraining Order
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying a petition for a disorderly conduct restraining order is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Kraft v. State 2025 ND 155
Docket No.: 20250180
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A motion to summarily dismiss an application for postconviction relief under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09 is analogous to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). When the State moves for summary dismissal, the motion is treated like a N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b) motion subject to the response times in N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a), which is 14 days.

A motion for summary disposition under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09.1 is analogous to and governed by the procedure for a motion for summary judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 56. When the State moves for summary disposition, the motion is treated as a N.D.R.Civ.P. 56 motion for summary judgment, which gives the petitioner thirty days to respond.

Kraft v. State 2025 ND 155
Docket No.: 20250181
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: A motion to summarily dismiss an application for postconviction relief under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09 is analogous to a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted under N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). When the State moves for summary dismissal, the motion is treated like a N.D.R.Civ.P. 12(b) motion subject to the response times in N.D.R.Ct. 3.2(a), which is 14 days.

A motion for summary disposition under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-09.1 is analogous to and governed by the procedure for a motion for summary judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 56. When the State moves for summary disposition, the motion is treated as a N.D.R.Civ.P. 56 motion for summary judgment, which gives the petitioner thirty days to respond.

State v. Benter 2025 ND 154
Docket No.: 20240287
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: In a criminal case, a defendant's notice of appeal must be filed with the clerk of the supreme court within 30 days after the entry of the judgment or order being appealed. The timely filing of a notice of appeal is mandatory and jurisdictional and cannot be waived by the appellate court.

State v. Grewe 2025 ND 153
Docket No.: 20250010
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: An appeal from a judgment of conviction in a criminal case was untimely where it was not filed within 30 days of the judgment of conviction and no motion to extend the time to file the notice of appeal was filed. The appeal from an order denying a N.D.R.Crim.P. 29 motion was not appealable in the absence of a timely appeal from the judgment of conviction. The appeal is dismissed in accord with State v. Jenkins, 339 N.W.2d 567 (N.D. 1983).

Campbell v. State 2025 ND 152
Docket No.: 20250008
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Under the Strickland test, an applicant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel must prove two elements: (1) that their counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and (2) that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different.

Courts need not analyze both elements of the Strickland test and should resolve the case by addressing a single prong when possible.

Under N.D.C.C. § 29-32.1-01(1)(e), postconviction relief is available when evidence, not previously presented and heard, exists requiring vacation of the conviction or sentence in the interest of justice.

Applications based on newly discovered evidence are reviewed as a motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence under N.D.R.Crim.P. 33.

To prevail on a motion for a new trial on the ground of newly discovered evidence, the defendant must show: (1) the evidence was discovered after trial, (2) the failure to learn about the evidence at the time of trial was not the result of the defendant's lack of diligence, (3) the newly discovered evidence is material to the issues at trial, and (4) the weight and quality of the newly discovered evidence would likely result in an acquittal. A motion for new trial based on newly discovered evidence rests within the discretion of the trial court, and we will not reverse the court's denial of the motion unless the court has abused its discretion.

Interest of J.L. 2025 ND 151
Docket No.: 20250128
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order finding children in need of protection and finding social services engaged in active efforts to place the children in an Indian home as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of J.L. 2025 ND 151
Docket No.: 20250129
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order finding children in need of protection and finding social services engaged in active efforts to place the children in an Indian home as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Interest of J.L. 2025 ND 151
Docket No.: 20250130
Filing Date: 9/25/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Deprivation
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order finding children in need of protection and finding social services engaged in active efforts to place the children in an Indian home as required by the Indian Child Welfare Act is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).