 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| State v. Feist, No. 20050152,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Because record showed that district court did not substantially comply with the requirements of N.D. R. Crim. P. 11(c) and there was ambiguity apparent on the record as to whether a plea agreement existed between the parties, pursuant to N.D. R. Crim. P. 32, the withdrawal of defendant's guilty plea was necessary to correct a manifest injustice.
|
|||||
| State v. Nikle, No. 20050172,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The trial court did not commit obvious error under N.D. R. Crim. P. 52(b) in retaining the original jury panel where a statement by a member of the venire did not taint the entire jury pool, and defendant failed to establish he received ineffective assistance of counsel as the outcome would not have changed had counsel acted differently.
|
|||||
| State v. Schrum, No. 20050267,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant's sentencing credit of two days was improper pursuant to N.D. Cent. Code § 12.1-32-02(2) because he was incarcerated for 13 days prior to the entry of the criminal judgment.
|
|||||
| State v. Smith, No. 20050264,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court did not abuse its discretion when it denied defendant's motion to refund fines and administrative fees incurred in relation to his criminal convictions because although he appealed his drug related convictions, he failed to appeal the alcohol conviction as its case number was not in his notice of appeal as required by N.D. R. App. P. 3(c)(2).
|
|||||
| Wheeler v. Gardner, No. 20050166,
SUPREME COURT OF NORTH DAKOTA, January 31, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: District court did not err in granting summary judgment in favor of a correctional facility and finding N.D. Cent. Code § 12-44.1-12.1(3)(a) did not limit the charge to an inmate's account for a medical visit to a maximum of $10 and the facility was authorized to withdraw the full amount of the dental services provided to inmate in amount of $197.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
