Bell v. N.D. Dep't of Transp. (N.D. 2012). · Go Syfert
Bell v. N.D. Dep't of Transp. (N.D. 2012). Book View Copy Cite
13 citation events (13 in the last 25 years) across 1 distinct court.
Strongest positive: Skobodzinski v. NDDOT (nd, 2025-04-24)
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Skobodzinski v. NDDOT
N.D. · 2025 · signal: see also · confidence low
See Boyce, 488 N.W.2d at 47 (recognizing “[c]ircumstances will vary[,]” and stating “[t]here is no rule that a police officer notify an accused about how long he may have to contact an attorney”); see also Bell, 2012 ND 102 , ¶ 22 (stating “[b]ecause circumstances will vary, we decline to require law enforcement to inform a DUI arrestee when the two-hour period for chemical testing will expire”); Wetzel, 2001 ND 35, ¶ 16 (stating “[b]ecause circumstances vary, we declined to fix a certain amount of time for contacting an attorney. . . . the standard is reasonableness under the …
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Bell
v.
N.D. Department of Transportation
20110201.
North Dakota Supreme Court.
May 17, 2012.
Cited by 11 opinions  |  Published

Filed 5/17/12 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2012 ND 96

W.J. Wilson, Jr., Petitioner and Appellant

v.

State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

Nos. 20110362 & 20110363

Appeal from the District Court of Ward County, Northwest Judicial District, the Honorable Gary H. Lee, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Bobbi Brown Weiler, 418 E. Rosser Avenue, Suite 320, Bismarck, N.D. 58501, for petitioner and appellant.

Kelly Ann Dillon, Assistant State’s Attorney, Courthouse, P.O Box 5005, Minot, N.D. 58702-5005, for respondent and appellee.

Wilson v. State

Nos. 20110362 & 20110363

Per Curiam.

[¶1] W.J. Wilson, Jr. appeals from the trial court’s order dismissing his application for post-conviction relief.  On appeal, Wilson argues he was denied due process of law because the court did not view an allegedly altered videotape at the hearing on his post-conviction relief application.  Wilson also contends he received ineffective assistance of counsel because his trial counsel failed to call and question a certain witness.  We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2) and (6).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom

Carol Ronning Kapsner