Opinions

State v. Johnson 2015 ND 19
Docket No.: 20140286
Filing Date: 2/12/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order revoking probation and sentencing a defendant is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7).

Beylund v. Levi 2015 ND 18
Docket No.: 20140133
Filing Date: 2/12/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The implied consent laws do not violate the Fourth Amendment, under the doctrine of unconstitutional conditions.

Disciplinary Board v. Stanley 2015 ND 17
Docket No.: 20140420
Filing Date: 2/10/2015
Case Type: Discipline - Attorney - Original Proceeding
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Lawyer reprimanded.

Law v. Whittet, et al. (cross-reference w/20130241 & 20140248) 2015 ND 16
Docket No.: 20140268
Filing Date: 1/22/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court amended judgment will be reversed and remanded for failure to follow the mandate of the Supreme Court.
A change of judge may be ordered on remand when a judge is unable or unwilling to follow the mandate of the Supreme Court.

State v. Galvez 2015 ND 14
Docket No.: 20140029
Filing Date: 1/15/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Under the Equal Protection Clause, the use of peremptory challenges to exclude jurors solely on the basis of their gender is unconstitutional.
A party claiming gender discrimination during the selection of the jury pool bears the burden of establishing a prima facie case of purposeful discrimination.
A party challenging the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction entered on a jury verdict must show that the evidence, when viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, reveals no reasonable inference of guilt.

Mertz v. Mertz 2015 ND 13
Docket No.: 20140072
Filing Date: 1/15/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Divorce - Property
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Comprehensive analysis under the Ruff-Fischer guidelines is emphasized over the disadvantaged spouse doctrine, which has been eliminated.
The district court must consider all the relevant factors under the Ruff-Fischer guidelines in determining spousal support, explaining its rationale for its determination.
Because of the interrelation, the district court may reconsider the property distribution when determining spousal support.

Interest of L.B. (CONFIDENTIAL) 2015 ND 12
Docket No.: 20140447
Filing Date: 1/15/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Mental Health
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: A district court's finding that a person is chemically dependent and requires treatment will not be reversed unless it is clearly erroneous.
A respondent has no statutory right to examine an expert examiner who does not testify at the hearing.

State v. Kovalevich 2015 ND 11
Docket No.: 20140091
Filing Date: 1/15/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A criminal defendant must raise post-trial arguments about alleged discovery violations in a motion for a new trial.
A juror may testify about the receipt of extraneous prejudicial information by the jury, but the juror may not testify about its subjective effect on the verdict or on the jury's individual deliberations.
A motion for a new trial must specify the alleged defects and errors with particularity.

Combs v. Lund 2015 ND 10
Docket No.: 20140163
Filing Date: 1/15/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A respondent's right to due process is violated by a disorderly conduct restraining order that creates a right of review in a divorce proceeding to which the respondent is not a party.
Disorderly conduct restraining orders require findings of fact sufficient to enable an appellate review.

Keller v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation 2015 ND 9
Docket No.: 20140238
Filing Date: 1/15/2015
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: The failure of law enforcement to forward the results of a drug analytical report of a blood sample to the Department of Transportation does not deprive the Department of its authority to suspend an individual's driving privileges for driving under the influence of alcohol.