New opinions: July 23, 2026

Interest of B.W. 2026 ND 153
Docket No.: 20260219
Filing Date: 7/23/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: An appellant's brief must cite to the record to show an issue was preserved for review, or state the grounds for seeking review of an issue that was not preserved. Appellate rules must be complied with and treated respectfully.

A juvenile court acquires personal jurisdiction over a parent by service of the summons under N.D.R.Civ.P. 4 or the parent waiving service of the summons by written stipulation or by voluntary appearance at a hearing.

Rule 10(b)(1), N.D.R.Juv.P., allows a juvenile court to receive evidence in support of a termination petition, or reschedule the hearing, if a parent who has been properly served with a summons or notice fails to appear at a hearing. A parent who receives proper notice of a hearing need not also receive a formal summons before the court may proceed under the rule.

Under N.D.R.Juv.P. 10(b)(1), a juvenile court may enter default if a parent fails to attend a hearing, which includes status and scheduling conferences.

Interest of R.W. 2026 ND 153
Docket No.: 20260220
Filing Date: 7/23/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Juvenile - Termination of Parental Rights
Author: Bahr, Douglas Alan

Highlight: An appellant's brief must cite to the record to show an issue was preserved for review, or state the grounds for seeking review of an issue that was not preserved. Appellate rules must be complied with and treated respectfully.

A juvenile court acquires personal jurisdiction over a parent by service of the summons under N.D.R.Civ.P. 4 or the parent waiving service of the summons by written stipulation or by voluntary appearance at a hearing.

Rule 10(b)(1), N.D.R.Juv.P., allows a juvenile court to receive evidence in support of a termination petition, or reschedule the hearing, if a parent who has been properly served with a summons or notice fails to appear at a hearing. A parent who receives proper notice of a hearing need not also receive a formal summons before the court may proceed under the rule.

Under N.D.R.Juv.P. 10(b)(1), a juvenile court may enter default if a parent fails to attend a hearing, which includes status and scheduling conferences.

Highlight: In determining the amount of restitution, the district court must consider the "reasonable damages sustained by the victim . . . limited to those directly related to the criminal offense and expenses actually sustained as a direct result of the defendant's criminal action" under N.D.C.C. § 21.1-32-08(4). "Directly related" and "direct result" require "an immediate and intimate causal connection between the criminal conduct and the damages or expenses for which restitution is ordered."

A district court does not abuse its discretion by including investigative costs incurred by a business to uncover the extent, quantity, and remedy an employee's theft in a restitution award under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-08(4)

Expenses incurred by a business for employee's failure to withhold insurance premiums from employee's own paychecks is directly related to employee's criminal offense of theft from business and may be included in a restitution award under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-08(4).

Paola v. State 2026 ND 151
Docket No.: 20260042
Filing Date: 7/23/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Civil - Post-Conviction Relief
Author: McEvers, Lisa K. Fair

Highlight: Postconviction relief applicants alleging ineffective assistance of trial counsel in the context of plea bargains must show counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and the outcome of the plea process would have been different with competent advice.

Trial counsel advising a defendant to reject a plea offer and enter an open guilty plea is not ineffective merely because the defendant received a longer sentence than the one offered.

When a defendant raises an argument on appeal which was not presented to the district court, despite having the opportunity to do so, this Court will decline to consider the merits of that argument.

Highlight: When parties stipulate at an evidentiary hearing to present evidence on and address an issue after the hearing, a district court does not abuse its discretion by considering post-hearing evidentiary submissions on that issue.

If a child support obligor makes a voluntary change in employment resulting in a reduction of income, as defined by N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-07(7), a district court has discretion to impute the obligor's income.

When a district court's reasons are fairly discernible by deduction or reason from the findings, and those reasons are supported by the law and the record, we will not upset an award of child support merely because findings could have been
more complete. When a district court finds that an obligor made a voluntary change in employment resulting in a reduction of income, the court is not required to make findings on the purpose for the change if we can discern the purpose from the court's findings.

Child support orders must include a statement of the obligor's net income used to determine the child support obligation and how net income was determined under N.D. Admin. Code § 75-02-04.1-07(7). As a matter of law, a district court
must clearly set forth how it arrived at the amount of income and level of child support. A district court does not err as a matter of law if the court's findings explicitly rely on stipulated third party's calculations, so long as those calculations clearly explain how the amount of income and level of child support were determined in accordance with the child support guidelines.

A modified child support obligation should generally take effect from the date of the motion to modify unless a district court has good reason to set a different date. A district court abuses its discretion by setting a later effective date without making findings explaining its decision.

Highlight: An appeal from a juvenile court order finding children in need of protection and placing them in the care, custody, and control of a human service zone is affirmed.

The interpretation and application of the North Dakota Rules of Juvenile Procedure present a question of law, which is reviewed de novo.

After the initial summons has been served and the juvenile court's jurisdiction is established, N.D.R.Juv.P. 9(a)(3) permits the court to provide notice of the date and time of a continued proceeding either in writing or orally on the record, and a new summons is not required for each continued proceeding. Under N.D.R.Juv.P. 10(b), a court may proceed in a parent's absence and receive evidence in support of the petition when the parent, after being properly given notice of a hearing, fails to appear at the hearing.

A juvenile court's finding that continued custody of an Indian child by the parent is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage is a finding of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard, with appreciable weight given to the juvenile court's findings and due regard for its opportunity to assess the credibility of the witnesses.

Under N.D.C.C. § 27-19.1-01, qualified expert witness testimony is considered in context and as a whole. A qualified expert witness's clarification that the opinion—that returning the children would likely result in serious physical or emotional damage—is the opinion of the Indian child's tribe reached after being staffed, rather than the witness's opinion alone, may be understood to support rather than disavow the opinion; a finding of likely serious emotional or physical damage resting on that testimony, together with other evidence in the record, is not clearly erroneous.

Highlight: An appeal from a juvenile court order finding children in need of protection and placing them in the care, custody, and control of a human service zone is affirmed.

The interpretation and application of the North Dakota Rules of Juvenile Procedure present a question of law, which is reviewed de novo.

After the initial summons has been served and the juvenile court's jurisdiction is established, N.D.R.Juv.P. 9(a)(3) permits the court to provide notice of the date and time of a continued proceeding either in writing or orally on the record, and a new summons is not required for each continued proceeding. Under N.D.R.Juv.P. 10(b), a court may proceed in a parent's absence and receive evidence in support of the petition when the parent, after being properly given notice of a hearing, fails to appear at the hearing.

A juvenile court's finding that continued custody of an Indian child by the parent is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage is a finding of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard, with appreciable weight given to the juvenile court's findings and due regard for its opportunity to assess the credibility of the witnesses.

Under N.D.C.C. § 27-19.1-01, qualified expert witness testimony is considered in context and as a whole. A qualified expert witness's clarification that the opinion—that returning the children would likely result in serious physical or emotional damage—is the opinion of the Indian child's tribe reached after being staffed, rather than the witness's opinion alone, may be understood to support rather than disavow the opinion; a finding of likely serious emotional or physical damage resting on that testimony, together with other evidence in the record, is not clearly erroneous.

Highlight: An appeal from a juvenile court order finding children in need of protection and placing them in the care, custody, and control of a human service zone is affirmed.

The interpretation and application of the North Dakota Rules of Juvenile Procedure present a question of law, which is reviewed de novo.

After the initial summons has been served and the juvenile court's jurisdiction is established, N.D.R.Juv.P. 9(a)(3) permits the court to provide notice of the date and time of a continued proceeding either in writing or orally on the record, and a new summons is not required for each continued proceeding. Under N.D.R.Juv.P. 10(b), a court may proceed in a parent's absence and receive evidence in support of the petition when the parent, after being properly given notice of a hearing, fails to appear at the hearing.

A juvenile court's finding that continued custody of an Indian child by the parent is likely to result in serious emotional or physical damage is a finding of fact reviewed under the clearly erroneous standard, with appreciable weight given to the juvenile court's findings and due regard for its opportunity to assess the credibility of the witnesses.

Under N.D.C.C. § 27-19.1-01, qualified expert witness testimony is considered in context and as a whole. A qualified expert witness's clarification that the opinion—that returning the children would likely result in serious physical or emotional damage—is the opinion of the Indian child's tribe reached after being staffed, rather than the witness's opinion alone, may be understood to support rather than disavow the opinion; a finding of likely serious emotional or physical damage resting on that testimony, together with other evidence in the record, is not clearly erroneous.

State v. Fox 2026 ND 148
Docket No.: 20250392
Filing Date: 7/23/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Tufte, Jerod E.

Highlight: A district court's evidentiary decisions are reviewed for abuse of discretion; claimed violations of the constitutional right to confrontation are reviewed de novo.

The district court did not abuse its discretion by excluding evidence of a victim's alleged sexually explicit online relationship, where the court allowed crossexamination on whether the victim was disciplined and upset, and the explicit content added only marginal probative value to the motive theory.

Exclusion of the Rule 412 evidence did not violate the defendant's Sixth Amendment confrontation rights where the limitation was neither arbitrary nor
disproportionate—the court permitted the relevant cross-examination (discipline and anger) and the explicit sexual content was not necessary to elicit
the alleged motive to fabricate.

Highlight: The right to counsel at a probation revocation proceeding provided by N.D.R.Crim.P. 32(f)(3)(A) requires a probationer to be represented unless the
right is waived by the probationer.

Waiver of the right to counsel must be voluntary and made knowingly and intelligently with sufficient findings to support the determination.

Highlight: The right to counsel at a probation revocation proceeding provided by N.D.R.Crim.P. 32(f)(3)(A) requires a probationer to be represented unless the
right is waived by the probationer.

Waiver of the right to counsel must be voluntary and made knowingly and intelligently with sufficient findings to support the determination.

Highlight: The right to counsel at a probation revocation proceeding provided by N.D.R.Crim.P. 32(f)(3)(A) requires a probationer to be represented unless the
right is waived by the probationer.

Waiver of the right to counsel must be voluntary and made knowingly and intelligently with sufficient findings to support the determination.

Highlight: The right to counsel at a probation revocation proceeding provided by N.D.R.Crim.P. 32(f)(3)(A) requires a probationer to be represented unless the
right is waived by the probationer.

Waiver of the right to counsel must be voluntary and made knowingly and intelligently with sufficient findings to support the determination.

Highlight: The right to counsel at a probation revocation proceeding provided by N.D.R.Crim.P. 32(f)(3)(A) requires a probationer to be represented unless the
right is waived by the probationer.

Waiver of the right to counsel must be voluntary and made knowingly and intelligently with sufficient findings to support the determination.

Highlight: Standing to challenge an administrative decision requires participation in the proceeding. The burden of establishing participation requires a showing of minimal involvement. This burden can be satisfied by raising an issue or advocating for an outcome during the administrative proceeding.

Intervention during an administrative proceeding is liberally granted. Intervention after an agency has issued a final decision is unusual and not often granted. The abuse of discretion standard applies to intervention decisions in administrative proceedings.

State v. Quam 2026 ND 145
Docket No.: 20260110
Filing Date: 7/23/2026
Case Type: Appeal - Criminal - Sexual Offense
Author: Jensen, Jon J.

Highlight: Probable cause to issue a search warrant exists when the facts and circumstances would warrant a person of reasonable caution to believe the contraband or evidence sought will probably be found in the place to be searched.

The totality of the circumstances, which included defendant's admissions that he used the phrase "teen girl f**k" as an internet search query; that the search returned results depicting females he estimated to be 15 or 16 years old; that he could not recall whether those females were nude or engaged in sexual acts; that he used a TOR (the onion router) browser to hide his activity from his wife; and that he used his home's basement TV to view websites depicting females he estimated to be 15 or 16 years old, was sufficient to establish probable cause to issue a search warrant for the defendant's home.

Coupled with the admissions discussed above, the warrant application demonstrated a sufficient nexus between evidence of child sexual abuse material and the defendant's home reinforced by the affiant's training and experience that persons who possess such material almost always maintain it in the privacy and security of their home.