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.
11 - 20 of 11103 results
Peltier v. State (consolidated w/20230391)
Highlight: A district court's order on petitions is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.35.1(a)(2). |
Rivera-Rieffel v. State
Highlight: An order denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). |
Jung v. State
Highlight: To succeed on a claim for ineffective assistance of counsel, the applicant must show: (1) counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's unprofessional errors, the result of the proceeding would have been different. |
Interest of S.M.F.
Highlight: A juvenile court order terminating parental rights is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4). |
Morales v. Weatherford U.S., et al.
Highlight: Only those judgments and decrees which constitute a final determination of the parties' rights to an action and those orders enumerated in N.D.C.C. § 28-27-02 are appealable. |
Harris v. Oasis Petroleum, et al.
Highlight: A motion to alter or amend the judgment under N.D.R.Civ.P. 59(j) is reviewed for an abuse of discretion. |
Glaum v. State
Highlight: Rule 58 of the North Dakota Supreme Court Administrative Rules addresses vexatious litigation. Litigation means any civil or disciplinary action or proceeding, including any appeal from an administrative agency, any review of a referee order by the district court, and any appeal to the supreme court. Rule 58 does not apply to criminal actions or documents filed in criminal actions. |
State v. Williams
Highlight: A criminal judgment for attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(3) and (4). |
SPOTTIE v. BAIUL-FARINA, et al.
Highlight: Wholesale adoption of proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law is disapproved. |
Interest of Skorick
Highlight: A district court must have sufficient factual findings to show a sexually dangerous individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Past conduct is relevant and may be considered with present conduct to determine if an individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. Failure to attend treatment might demonstrate inability to control behavior just as violation of other institutional rules. The district court's findings are sufficient to show the individual continues to have an inability to control his behavior. |