Bechtle v. Bechtle
Opinion
FILED
IN THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
SEPTEMBER 14, 2023 STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
2023 ND 166
Nichole Bechtle, n.k.a. Nichole Hammeren, Plaintiff and Appellee v.
Joshua R. Bechtle, Defendant and Appellant and State of North Dakota, Statutory Real Party in Interest
No. 20230054
Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable David E. Reich, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Erica J. Shively, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
William Woodworth, Bismarck, ND, for defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.
Bechtle v. Bechtle
No. 20230054
Per Curiam.
[¶1] Joshua Bechtle appeals from a district court’s order denying his motion to modify parenting time. Joshua Bechtle argues the court erred by finding no material change in circumstances after he completed sex offender treatment and probation. Joshua Bechtle also argues the court erred in its review of the best interest factors.
[¶2] The district court found no material change in circumstances existed because it was known at the time of the initial parenting time order that Joshua Bechtle’s parole would end, he would complete sex offender treatment and remained a registered sex offender until 2031. Because this issue is dispositive, we decline to address other issues raised on appeal. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).
[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
Daniel J. Crothers Lisa Fair McEvers Jerod E. Tufte Douglas A. Bahr
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
2023 ND 166 (Bechtle v. Bechtle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.