Recent Opinions
|
Johnson v. Menard 2021 ND 19
Highlight: During trial, a party can make a motion for judgment as a matter of law alleging insufficient evidence under N.D.R.Civ.P. 50(a). However, after the jury returns its verdict the party must renew the motion under N.D.R.Civ.P. 50(b) to preserve the sufficiency of the evidence issue for review on appeal. |
|
State v. Watson 2021 ND 18 Highlight: A defendant may not withdraw a guilty plea after the court has imposed a sentence unless the defendant proves that withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice. |
|
Willprecht v. Willprecht 2021 ND 17
Highlight: A district court’s use, on remand, of its previous Ruff-Fischer guidelines analysis is not by itself clearly erroneous. |
|
State v. Bear King 2021 ND 16 Highlight: The criminal judgment entered after a jury verdict is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (7). |
|
Interest of A.R.S. 2021 ND 15 Highlight: District court judgment finding children are deprived is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
Munzal v. State 2021 ND 14 Highlight: An order denying an application for post-conviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (7). |
|
Matter of Didier 2021 ND 13 Highlight: A district court order denying request for discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
|
State v. Rivera-Rieffel 2021 ND 9 Highlight: Criminal conviction for murder and child abuse is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3). |
|
Young v. Burleigh Morton Detention Center, et al. 2021 ND 8
Highlight: A violation of the Sixth Amendment right to counsel does not occur unless the government knowingly intrudes into the attorney-client relationship and the intrusion prejudices the defendant or creates a substantial threat of prejudice.??? |
|
State v. Aune 2021 ND 7 Highlight: A defendant may not challenge a jury verdict as inconsistent based upon an alleged error he invited by requesting an instruction on a lesser included offense. If a defendant does not object to the introduction of prior convictions at sentencing, and the prior convictions were not relied upon to enhance the term of incarceration, the appropriate standard of review is obvious error. It is not error to consider a defendant’s prior convictions as a part of their criminal history under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-04 if there has been no showing that the prior convictions were uncounseled and without proper waiver. |