On May 16, 2024, several cases were reviewed and opinions issued by various judges. The case of Brown v. State (Docket No.: 20230364) filed under the category of Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief was authored by Douglas Alan Bahr. The opinion stated that "The definition of official detention does not preclude custody while on probation." Furthermore, it clarified that an unambiguous sentence pronouncement controls over an ambiguous sentence, whether oral or written. When there is ambiguity between two sentences, the record must be examined to determine the district court's intent.
In the case of State v. Rangel (Docket No.: 20230356), filed under Appeal - Criminal - Misc. Felony, Judge Bahr opined that a criminal defendant may withdraw a guilty plea after sentencing only by demonstrating a manifest injustice. The defendant has the burden of proving withdrawal is necessary to correct a manifest injustice. The district court has discretion in finding whether a manifest injustice necessitating the withdrawal of a guilty plea exists, and the court's decision is reviewed for abuse of discretion.
Armitage v. Armitage (Docket No.: 20230368), filed under Appeal - Civil - Child Support, saw Judge Bahr state that a district court's decision on primary residential responsibility is a finding of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard of review. This Court on appeal does not reweigh the evidence nor reassess the credibility of witnesses and will not retry a custody case or substitute its judgment for a district court's initial primary residential responsibility decision merely because this Court might have reached a different result.
Aune v. State (Docket No.: 20230273), filed under Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief, was authored by Jerod E. Tufte who stated that postconviction relief proceedings are appropriately treated as a continuation of the criminal prosecution for purposes of N.D.C.C. § 29-15-21, and the applicant is not entitled to a new judge when the postconviction judge was also the trial judge.
The case of State v. Castleman (Docket No.: 20230371), filed under Appeal - Criminal - Other, was authored by Jon J. Jensen who highlighted that under N.D.R.Crim.P. 14 a defendant must show more than naked assertions that prejudice may occur based on the number of offenses being charged and instead must show he suffered substantial prejudice as a result of the joinder.
Other cases reviewed include State v. Anderson (Docket No.: 20230374), Solberg v. Hennessy (Docket No.: 20230289), State v. Eggl (Docket No.: 20230376), Peltier v. State (consolidated w/20230392) Docket No.: 20230391, Peltier v. State (consolidated w/20230391) Docket No.: 20230392, Rivera-Rieffel v. State Docket No.: 20230402, Jung v. State Docket No.: 20240031, and Interest of S.M.F. Docket No.: 20240097.