Opinions

State v. Gaede 2007 ND 125
Docket No.: 20060188
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A defendant may not be convicted upon the testimony of an accomplice unless the accomplice's testimony is corroborated by other evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the crime.
Testimony or argument about a defendant's post-arrest silence may constitute an improper comment about the defendant's invocation of the right to remain silent.
Evidence of prior bad acts or convictions is not admissible to prove a defendant's character in order to show action in conformity therewith, but may be admissible for other purposes, such as motive, intent, preparation, or plan.
Prior-bad-act evidence may be admissible to provide a more complete story of a crime by putting the crime in context of happenings near in time and place.

Silbernagel, et al. v. Silbernagel, et al. 2007 ND 124
Docket No.: 20060037
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Once a settlement agreement is merged into a judgment, the agreement is interpreted and enforced as a final judgment and not as a separate contract between the parties.
The parol evidence rule is a rule of substantive law and precludes the use of evidence of prior negotiations and agreements to vary or add to the terms expressed in the written contract.
A district court's findings should be stated with sufficient specificity to enable a reviewing court to understand the factual basis for the decision.
Whether to administer sanctions for noncompliance with the Rules of Appellate Procedure is discretionary with the Court.

Steen v. State (cross-reference w/20040052) 2007 ND 123
Docket No.: 20060349
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A petitioner for post-conviction relief has the burden of establishing grounds for post-conviction relief.
An application for post-conviction relief may be denied on grounds of res judicata and misuse of process.
Post-conviction relief may be denied as res judicata if the same claim or claims were fully and finally determined in a previous proceeding. Misuse of process occurs when the applicant inexcusably fails either to raise a claim in a proceeding leading to judgment of conviction and sentence or in a previous post-conviction proceeding, or if the applicant files multiple applications containing a claim so lacking in factual support or legal basis as to be frivolous.

State v. Schweitzer 2007 ND 122
Docket No.: 20060243
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Assault
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: For a statement to be admissible under the "excited utterance" exception to the hearsay rule, the proponent must show: (1) a startling event or condition; and (2) the statement is the product of the declarant's stress or excitement resulting from the startling event or condition.
Hearsay included within hearsay is not excluded as hearsay if each part of the combined statements falls within a hearsay exception.
A conviction will be reversed on the ground of insufficient evidence only if, after viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the verdict, no rational factfinder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.
A defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel has a heavy burden of proving: (1) counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) the defendant was prejudiced by the counsel's deficient performance.

Rahn v. State (Consolidated w/20070023 & 20070024) 2007 ND 121
Docket No.: 20070022
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: An order denying a motion to correct an illegal sentence under N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(a) is appealable, but an order denying a motion for reduction of sentence under N.D.R.Crim.P. 35(b) is not appealable.
Post-conviction proceedings under N.D.C.C. ch. 29-32.1 may not be used to challenge the Department of Corrections' failure to provide medical treatment to an inmate.

McGhee v. Mergenthal 2007 ND 120
Docket No.: 20060268
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Real Property
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: An implied trust is created by operation of law and is of two types: constructive trusts and resulting trusts.
An implied trust must be established by clear and convincing evidence.
A resulting trust stems from acts or expressions of the parties indicating an intent that a trust relation result from their transaction.
The two essential elements of a constructive trust are unjust enrichment and a confidential relationship.

Mann, et al. v. N.D. Tax Commissioner, et al. 2007 ND 119
Docket No.: 20060366
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Tax Realted
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: Due process requires a State to provide meaningful backward-looking relief to rectify any unconstitutional deprivation that occurs when a state requires a taxpayer to pay a tax without an opportunity to challenge whether the tax is illegal before payment.
A statute may be applied retroactively when the legislature clearly intended retroactive application of the statute.
A district court has broad discretion in deciding whether to certify a class action.
A successful litigant is not entitled to attorney's fees unless authorized by statute or contract.

Noorlun v. State (cross-reference w/20070014) 2007 ND 118
Docket No.: 20070009
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: In a post-conviction proceeding, a misuse of process occurs if a defendant has inexcusably failed to raise an issue in a proceeding leading to a conviction and seeks review in an application for post-conviction relief, or if the defendant inexcusably fails to pursue an issue on appeal which was raised and litigated in the original trial court proceeding.
A defendant claiming ineffective assistance of counsel has a heavy burden of proving that counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and that the defendant was prejudiced by counsel's deficient performance.

Bienek v. Department of Transportation 2007 ND 117
Docket No.: 20070032
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Administrative - Department of Transportation
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: Appellate review of administrative license suspensions is limited to the record before the agency.
On legal questions, such as an interpretation of a statute, an agency's decision is fully reviewable on appeal.
When a general statutory provision is in conflict with a special provision in the same or in another statute, the two must be construed, if possible, so that effect may be given to both provisions. If the conflict between the provisions is irreconcilable, the special provision prevails and is construed as an exception to the general provision unless the general provision is enacted later and it is the manifest legislative intent that such general provision shall prevail.
The Administrative Agencies Practice Act requires alleged errors from the administrative level be specifically enumerated for the district court.

State v. Hahne 2007 ND 116
Docket No.: 20070013
Filing Date: 7/25/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: A Fourth Amendment "seizure" occurs when a vehicle is stopped by police at a checkpoint. The basic question is whether the seizure is reasonable. If the seizure is reasonable, then it is constitutional.
Temporary law enforcement checkpoints or roadblocks established for particular public purposes are, in general, constitutional.
A court applies a three-part test to analyze the reasonableness of a law enforcement checkpoint: (1) a weighing of the gravity of the public concerns served by the seizure; (2) the degree to which the seizure advances the public interest; and (3) the severity of the interference with individual liberty.
Law enforcement checkpoints need not, as a matter of law, provide motorists with a way to avoid them. When considering the constitutional reasonableness of a checkpoint, avoidability is one factor that may be considered in evaluating the intrusion on the personal liberty of individual motorists.