Opinions
On this page, you can search and view the Supreme Court’s opinions. If you wish to review the docket or documents filed in a matter, please go to the Court’s public portal search page.
6041 - 6050 of 12279 results
|
Grosinger v. M.B.K. (CONFIDENTIAL)
2002 ND 25 Highlight: The phrase "likely to engage in further acts of sexually predatory conduct," used for commitment of sexually dangerous persons, means the person's propensity towards sexual violence is of such a degree as to pose a threat to others. |
|
State v. Roberson
2002 ND 24 Highlight: While a defendant's disruptive conduct in court may, in some instances, be sufficient grounds to require a competency hearing, not all disruptive defendants are incompetent to stand trial. Rather, the conduct may be contempt of court. |
|
Buchholz v. ND Department of Transportation
2002 ND 23 Highlight: A test operator scrupulously complies with the State Toxicologist's approved method to conduct a breath test if the test operator observes that the subject had nothing to eat, drink, or smoke in the twenty minutes prior to the collection of a breath sample. |
|
Ghorbanni v. ND Council on the Arts, et al.
2002 ND 22
Highlight: Presenting a claim letter to an assistant attorney general does not satisfy N.D.C.C. 32-12.2-04(1), which requires that notice of a claim against the State be presented to the Director of the Office of Management and Budget. |
|
Mau, et al. v. National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh
2002 ND 21 |
|
Piatz v. ND Dept. of Transportation
2002 ND 20 Highlight: Judgment of the district court affirming the decision of the Department of Transportation suspending driver's license for driving under the influence is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(5). |
|
State v. Guy
2002 ND 19 Highlight: Conviction of gross sexual imposition, burglary, robbery, and felonious restraint is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4) and (7). |
|
Burke v. State
2002 ND 18 Highlight: Judgment denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1) and (2). |
|
State v. Ringsrud
2002 ND 17 Highlight: Judgment of conviction for unlawful possession of drug paraphernalia is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(1), (3). |
|
State v. Randall
2002 ND 16
Highlight: Under N.D.R.Ev. 609 (a)(i), the burden is on the State to point to a danger of prejudice that substantially outweighs the probative value of prior convictions offered by a defendant in a criminal case to impeach a witness for the State. |