Justia North Dakota Supreme Court Opinion Summaries

Esteban Dominguez appealed a district court order denying his application for post-conviction relief. Dominguez argued his attempted murder conviction as illegal because N.D.C.C. 12.1-16-01(1)(b) could not be the underlying charge for an attempt offense. Upon review, the Supreme Court concluded that attempted murder under N.D.C.C. sections 12.1-06-01 and 12.1-16-01(1)(b) is not a cognizable offense, because attempt requires an intent to complete the commission of the underlying crime and a majority of the Court has held that murder under circumstances manifesting an extreme indifference to the value of human life results in an unintentional death. Accordingly, the Court reversed and remanded. View "Dominguez v. North Dakota" on Justia Law

Andrew Canfield appealed district court judgments entered upon conviction of four drug related offenses. He also appealed another order denying his motion to suppress evidence found during a search of his dormitory room. Upon review of the district court record, the Supreme Court concluded that there was a lack of evidence in the record to make meaningful appellate review of the issues presented impossible. Therefore, the Court reversed the judgments of conviction and remanded this case for further proceedings. View "North Dakota v. Canfield" on Justia Law

Kawo Otis Flah appealed a district court order mandating forfeiture of a 2002 Dodge Intrepid. Because Flah's due process rights were violated when the notice to appear was mailed to his residential address rather than at his in-custody address, the Supreme Court reversed the district court judgment and remanded the case for further proceedings. View "North Dakota v. One 2002 Dodge Intrepid Automobile" on Justia Law

Wayne Otto appealed after the district court denied his motion to suppress evidence obtained during a warrantless search of a camper. He entered a conditional plea of guilty. Upon review, the Supreme Court affirmed the judgment, concluding the camper fell within the scope of the automobile exception to the warrant requirement to the warrantless search because law enforcement had probable cause to believe drugs were present in the vehicle. View "North Dakota v. Otto" on Justia Law

Sulejman Bahtiraj appealed a district court's order denying his application for post-conviction relief. He was convicted after pleading guilty to a burglary charge. Upon review of the matter, the Supreme Court held that the district court did not err in denying Bahtiraj's motion for post-conviction relief. Bahtiraj failed to prove the prejudice necessary to satisfy the second prong of the two-prong "Strickland" test. View "Bahtiraj v. North Dakota" on Justia Law

Margaret Oakland appealed a district court order that granted summary judgment in favor of Bonnie Bowman, and Evan and Dayna Del Val. Oakland argued on appeal that her claim was not time-barred and equitable tolling should have applied. The Supreme Court affirmed, concluding that the district court did not err in determining that Oakland's claim was brought after the statute of limitations expired and that equitable tolling did not apply. View "Oakland v. Bowman" on Justia Law

Anna Holmes appealed a district court order denying an evidentiary hearing on her motion for change of custody. Because the Supreme Court concluded Holmes met her burden of establishing a prima facie case justifying modification, it reversed the district court order and remanded for an evidentiary hearing. View "Wald v. Holmes" on Justia Law

The North Dakota Department of Transportation appealed the district court's judgment reversing the administrative hearing officer's decision to suspend Dante Pesanti's driving privileges for 180 days for driving under the influence of alcohol. After review of the matter, the Supreme Court concluded reasonable minds could have concluded the administrative hearing officer's finding that the arresting officer had a reasonable and articulable suspicion that Pesanti had committed a violation is supported by the weight of the evidence on the entire record. Therefore, the Court reversed the district court's judgment and reinstated the administrative hearing officer's decision to suspend Pesanti's driving privileges. View "Pesanti v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation" on Justia Law

Kevin Moore appealed a district court order summarily dismissing his third postconviction application, arguing his postconviction counsel provided ineffective assistance by failing to file a brief in support of his postconviction application. Because the district court's summary dismissal of Moore's postconviction application was not erroneous, and because an ineffective assistance of postconviction counsel claim could not be established from the record, the Supreme Court affirmed the district court order. View "Moore v. North Dakota" on Justia Law

Ford Motor Credit Company appealed a district court order dismissing its action to renew a prior judgment. Ford sued Jeremy Halvorson in Minnesota on a contract matter. A judgment was entered in Minnesota against Halvorson. Halvorson moved from Minnesota to North Dakota, and the Minnesota judgment was registered in North Dakota in 2011. Halvorson did not pay the judgment. In 2013, Ford commenced this action to renew the judgment by personal service of the summons and complaint upon Halvorson. Halvorson did not respond to the summons and complaint, and Ford moved for entry of a default judgment against Halvorson. The district court, on its own motion, denied the motion for default judgment and instead dismissed Ford's complaint with prejudice, concluding that Ford's action was an improper duplicate action on the original debt and that the proper method to renew a judgment was by affidavit under the procedure provided in N.D.C.C. 28-20-21. Ford moved for reconsideration of the order dismissing its action, and the court entered an order affirming dismissal of the action. The Supreme Court reversed the district court's order dismissing Ford's action on the judgment. Because there was no reason apparent on the record to deny the default judgment, the Court remanded the case to the district court with directions to enter a default judgment in favor of Ford in its action to renew the prior judgment. View "Ford Motor Credit Co. v. Halvorson" on Justia Law