Opinions

State v. Bovkoon 2007 ND 47
Docket No.: 20060312
Filing Date: 4/10/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: Conviction for livestock running at large is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

Gratech Co., Ltd. v. Wold Engineering, P.C. (Cross-Ref. w/20030181) 2007 ND 46
Docket No.: 20060272
Filing Date: 3/27/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Contracts
Author: Maring, Mary

Highlight: An arbitration award is vacated only if it is completely irrational, in that the decision is either mistaken on its face or so mistaken as to result in real injustice or constructive fraud. An arbitrator's mistake as to fact or law is not a sufficient ground for overturning an arbitration award.
A successful litigant is not entitled to attorney's fees unless they are expressly authorized by statute or by agreement of the parties.
When no evidence is introduced and when the district court makes no specific findings of fact to support its determination on attorney's fees, it is impossible for the Supreme Court on appeal to appropriately review the decision of the district court.

State v. Frohlich 2007 ND 45
Docket No.: 20060178
Filing Date: 3/22/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Homicide
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: Motions for continuance will be granted only for good cause shown, either by affidavit or otherwise.
The denial of a continuance will be reversed only if it is an abuse of discretion.
When a continuance is sought to retain or replace counsel, the right to select counsel must be carefully balanced against the public's interest in the orderly administration of justice. In exercising its discretion, the district court may consider the time required for trial preparation and the diligence of the moving party.
Although relevant, evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice or needless presentation of cumulative evidence.
Cumulative evidence is additional evidence of the same character as existing evidence and that supports a fact established by the existing evidence.

City of Belfield v. Kilkenny 2007 ND 44
Docket No.: 20060176
Filing Date: 3/22/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Violation of City Ordinance
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: All laws must meet two requirements to survive a void-for-vagueness challenge: the law must create minimum guidelines for the reasonable police officer, judge, or jury charged with enforcement of the statute; and the law must provide a reasonable person with adequate and fair warning of the proscribed conduct.

State v. Mulske 2007 ND 43
Docket No.: 20060184
Filing Date: 3/22/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Theft
Author: Sandstrom, Dale

Highlight: If an accused desires to exercise his constitutional right to testify, the accused must act affirmatively and express to the court his desire to do so at the appropriate time or a knowing and voluntary waiver of the right is deemed to have occurred.
Unlike other constitutional rights that can be waived only after the court makes a formal inquiry, the court does not have a duty to verify that the defendant who is not testifying has waived his or her right voluntarily. Instead, the court is entitled to presume the attorney and the client discussed the right, and the defendant voluntarily agreed upon the final decision.

State v. Bachmeier 2007 ND 42
Docket No.: 20060235
Filing Date: 3/22/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: Observed traffic violations provide law enforcement officers with the basis for a stop.
The exclusionary rule is only designed to safeguard an individual's rights through its deterrent effect, and it is not a personal constitutional right of the party aggrieved.
North Dakota law authorizes law enforcement personnel operating a class A emergency vehicle to exceed the posted speed limit to pursue a suspected violator, so long as it can be done without danger to life or property.

Jelsing v. Peterson 2007 ND 41
Docket No.: 20060112
Filing Date: 3/22/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Child Support
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: An initial award of custody must be made to one parent before a court may decide whether to allow a custodial parent to relocate with a child to another state.

State v. Olson (Consolidated w/20060183) 2007 ND 40
Docket No.: 20060182
Filing Date: 3/22/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: VandeWalle, Gerald

Highlight: Permissible types of law enforcement-citizen encounters include: (1) arrests, which must be supported by probable cause; (2) Terry stops, seizures which must be supported by a reasonable and articulable suspicion of criminal activity; and (3) community caretaking encounters, which are not Fourth Amendment seizures.
Under Terry, police may, in appropriate circumstances and in an appropriate manner, detain an individual for investigative purposes when there is no probable cause to make an arrest if a reasonable and articulable suspicion exists that criminal activity is afoot.
The "lateness of the hour" is another factor that may raise the level of suspicion sufficient to justify an investigative stop.

State v. Brossart 2007 ND 39
Docket No.: 20060242
Filing Date: 3/22/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Misdemeanor
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A conviction rests upon insufficient evidence only when no rational factfinder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt after viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the prosecution and giving the prosecution the benefit of all inferences reasonably to be drawn in its favor
The proper remedy for addressing claims of unlawful police conduct is allowing the defendant to raise the issue to the factfinder and offer his resistance as a justification defense to the preventing-arrest charge.

State v. Altru Health Systems 2007 ND 38
Docket No.: 20060107
Filing Date: 3/8/2007
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Other
Author: Kapsner, Carol

Highlight: The district court's inquiry in proceedings for enforcing an administrative subpoena is limited to whether: (1) the subpoena is within the statutory authority of the agency; (2) the information sought is reasonably relevant to the inquiry of the administrative proceeding; (3) the subpoena is reasonably specific; and (4) the subpoena is not unduly broad or burdensome.
A court's decision to issue a protective order imposing restrictions on an administrative subpoena is reviewed for an abuse of discretion.