before hearing (North Dakota) · Go Syfert
← North Dakota issues

before hearing in North Dakota

11 North Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1991–2009 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by North Dakota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (2)

CaseFollowedCited
In Interest of MDNgreen
nd · 1992 · cited in 5 North Dakota opinions naming this issue, 1996–2003
2 sentences

2003The child was fourteen years of age or more at the time of the alleged conduct and the court determines that there is probable cause to believe the child committed the alleged delinquent act and the delinquent act involves the offense of ... the manufacture, delivery, or possession with intent to manufacture or deliver a controlled substance in violation of subdivision a or b of subsection 1 of section 19-03.1-23, except for the manufacture, delivery, or possession with intent to manufacture or deliver marijuana in an amount less than one pound [.45 kilograms][.] A juvenile judge’s authority t

2003The child was fourteen years of age or more at the time of the alleged conduct and the court determines that there is probable cause to believe the child committed the alleged delinquent act and the delinquent act involves the offense of ... the manufacture, delivery, or possession with intent to manufacture or deliver a controlled substance in violation of subdivision a or b of subsection 1 of section 19-03.1-23, except for the manufacture, delivery, or possession with intent to manufacture or deliver marijuana in an amount less than one pound [.45 kilograms][.] A juvenile judge's authority t

55
Draper v. United Statesgreen
scotus · 1959 · cited in 4 North Dakota opinions naming this issue, 1994–1997
2 sentences

1997N.D.C.C. § 1-02-03 provides that "[t]echnical words and phrases and such others as have acquired a particular and appropriate meaning in law, or as are defined by statute, must be construed according to such peculiar and appropriate meaning or definition." The meaning of "reasonable grounds" *217 is equivalent to "probable cause." In Interest of M.D.N., 493 N.W.2d 680, 684 (N.D. 1992); see also Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307 , 79 S.Ct. 329 , 3 L.Ed.2d 327 (1959).

1997N.D.C.C. § 1-02-03 provides that "[t]echnical words and phrases and such others as have acquired a particular and appropriate meaning in law, or as are defined by statute, must be construed according to such peculiar and appropriate meaning or definition." The meaning of "reasonable grounds" *217 is equivalent to "probable cause." In Interest of M.D.N., 493 N.W.2d 680, 684 (N.D. 1992); see also Draper v. United States, 358 U.S. 307 , 79 S.Ct. 329 , 3 L.Ed.2d 327 (1959).

44

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (2)

CaseCitedYears
State v. Fasteen green
nd · 2007
2 sentences

2009State v. Fasteen, 2007 ND 162, ¶ 8 , 740 N.W.2d 60 (citations omitted). [¶ 7] The relevant portion of the transferring statute at issue is N.D.C.C. § 27-20 — 34(l)(b) (emphasis added), which provides: After a petition has been filed alleging delinquency based on conduct which is designated a crime or public offense under the laws, including local ordinances or resolutions of this state, the court before hearing the petition on its merits shall transfer the offense for prosecution to the appropriate court having jurisdiction of the offense if: [[Image here]] b.

2009State v. Fasteen, 2007 ND 162, ¶ 8 , 740 N.W.2d 60 (citations omitted). [¶ 7] The relevant portion of the transferring statute at issue is N.D.C.C. § 27-20 — 34(l)(b) (emphasis added), which provides: After a petition has been filed alleging delinquency based on conduct which is designated a crime or public offense under the laws, including local ordinances or resolutions of this state, the court before hearing the petition on its merits shall transfer the offense for prosecution to the appropriate court having jurisdiction of the offense if: [[Image here]] b.

32009–2009
Andrews v. O'HEARN green
nd · 1986
1 sentence

1991Wold argues that Andrews v. O’Hearn, 387 N.W.2d 716 (N.D.1986), requires that a party challenge jury instructions first in the trial court through a motion for a new trial before the challenge may be made on appeal.

11991–1991

Where else courts name it

TX 26 (1915–2024) CA 13 (1933–2025) GA 12 (1909–2019) ND 11 (1991–2009) IL 8 (1928–2026) PA 6 (1975–2007) IA 6 (1953–2017) FL 5 (1980–2005) AZ 3 (1962–2019) CT 3 (1967–2005) KS 3 (1934–2011) WA 3 (1962–2015) AK 3 (1977–2021) TN 3 (2012–2015) NJ 2 (1992–2005) KY 2 (1937–2013) WY 2 (1980–1995) NM 2 (1986–1990) MT 2 (2011–2011) AR 2 (1966–2004) RI 2 (2009–2025) MD 2 (1986–1993) DE 2 (2023–2024)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check