New Opinions: December 31, 2025

State v. Medina 2025 ND 234
Docket No.: 20250178
Filing Date: 12/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: Rule 11(a)(2), N.D.R.Crim.P., addresses conditional guilty pleas and requires: (1) the defendant, any defendant's attorney and the prosecuting attorney consent in writing to the conditional plea; (2) the court accept the conditional plea and enter an order; and (3) the judgment specify the plea is conditional.

Temporary remand is warranted for the district court's determination whether the plea was conditional and, if so, entry of an order and judgment consistent with the requirements of N.D.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2).

State v. Lawrence 2025 ND 237
Docket No.: 20250299
Filing Date: 12/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Drugs/Contraband
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court order denying a petition to return forfeited bail is affirmed.

Bohe v. State 2025 ND 232
Docket No.: 20250285
Filing Date: 12/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: A district court order denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) & (4).

Highlight: The order denying the defendant's motion for recovery of attorney's fees and costs, brought in a criminal case after acquittal, is affirmed.

State v. Solis 2025 ND 233
Docket No.: 20250247
Filing Date: 12/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Crothers, Daniel John

Highlight: A district court did not abuse its discretion by requiring registration as a sex offender.

Under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-15(2)(b), a court may deviate from the registration requirement if the court makes findings on the specified criteria. The court is not required to make the findings unless it first exercises its discretion to deviate
from the registration requirement.

State v. Jenkins 2025 ND 229
Docket No.: 20250308
Filing Date: 12/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - DUI/DUS/APC
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: This Court lacks jurisdiction to review untimely appeals.

Inadequately briefed issues are waived.

Highlight: The district court must state its findings of fact with sufficient specificity to enable a reviewing court to understand the factual basis for its decisions.

Under the clearly erroneous standard of review, we do not reweigh the evidence or reassess the credibility of witnesses, and we will not retry a custody case or substitute our judgment for the district court's decision merely because we might have reached a different result. A fit non-custodial parent is routinely awarded some form of extended summer visitation unless the court has reason to deny it.

Appellate courts review the record and findings as a whole and if the controlling findings are supported by the evidence, they will be upheld on appeal notwithstanding immaterial misstatements in the lower court's decision.

A party is not entitled to attorney's fees on appeal if the issue is inadequately briefed or the appeal is not frivolous

Highlight: A district court has jurisdiction to modify a foreign custody determination, including visitation orders, when the child's home state is North Dakota and the child and parents no longer reside in the issuing jurisdiction.

Appellate courts have the authority and duty to determine the applicability of relevant statutes to legal controversies, even when the parties do not identify those statutes or argue for their application.

When a parent seeks to modify an existing nonparent visitation order, the court must apply the modification standards under the Uniform Nonparent Custody and Visitation Act.

When modifying an order granting nonparent visitation, the court must determine whether the nonparent rebutted in the initial proceeding the presumption that the parent's decision regarding visitation is in the child's best interest. If the nonparent rebutted the presumption in the initial proceeding, the presumption remains rebutted.

Highlight: District courts have wide judicial discretion in partition actions to do equity and to make a fair and just division of the property or proceeds between the parties, and great flexibility in fashioning appropriate relief for the parties.

The court may correct a clerical mistake or a mistake arising from oversight or omission whenever one is found in a judgment, order, or other part of the record. The task of weighing the evidence and judging the credibility of witnesses
belongs to the trier of fact, and this Court does not reweigh credibility or resolve conflicts in the evidence.

Geiger v. State 2025 ND 227
Docket No.: 20250236
Filing Date: 12/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying relief in a postconviction proceeding is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

Highlight: A judgment denying an application for postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (4).

Duffi v. State 2025 ND 226
Docket No.: 20250230
Filing Date: 12/31/2025
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: Per Curiam

Highlight: An order denying postconviction relief is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).