Johnson v. Raftevold

505 N.W.2d 110, 1993 N.D. LEXIS 160, 1993 WL 338603
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedSeptember 8, 1993
DocketCiv. 920239, 920381
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 505 N.W.2d 110 (Johnson v. Raftevold) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering North Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Johnson v. Raftevold, 505 N.W.2d 110, 1993 N.D. LEXIS 160, 1993 WL 338603 (N.D. 1993).

Opinion

LEVINE, Justice.

Ronald Raftevold, as Chief of Police for the City of Fargo, appeals from district court orders granting petitions for writs of habeas corpus by Eric Christopher Johnson and by Timothy Dornheim, two DUI arrestees who refused a blood alcohol test and, under a municipal court policy, were scheduled to be detained for twelve hours. We dismiss the appeals.

Although the parties have not questioned the appealability of the district court’s orders, we must dismiss an appeal on our own motion if we conclude that we do not have jurisdiction. E.g. Thompson v. Goetz, 455 N.W.2d 580 (N.D.1990). It is well established that an appeal from a final order in a habeas corpus proceeding is not permitted. Jensen v. State, 373 N.W.2d 894 (N.D.1985); In Interest of Klein, 325 N.W.2d 227 (N.D. 1982); Carruth v. Taylor, 8 N.D. 166, 77 N.W. 617 (1898). However, we have treated appeals from nonappealable orders as re quests for the discretionary exercise of our supervisory jurisdiction to rectify errors or prevent injustice when fundamental interests are involved and no adequate alternative remedies exist. Vorachek v. Citizens State Bank of Lankin, 461 N.W.2d 580 (N.D.1990); Thompson v. Goetz, supra; Garrison Memorial Hospital v. Rayer, 453 N.W.2d 787 (N.D. *111 1990); Odden v. O’Keefe, 450 N.W.2d 707 (N.D.1990); Minot Daily News v. Holum, 380 N.W.2d 347 (N.D.1986).

In this ease, we could exercise our discretion and review the district court’s orders granting the writs of habeas corpus under our constitutional power of superintending control. See In Interest of Klein, supra. However, we decline to do so not only because the petitioners are no longer involuntarily confined [In Interest of Klein ], but also because the same issues can be resolved in an appeal by the prosecution from an order dismissing the complaint against the DUI arrestees [Section 29-28-07, N.D.C.C. State v. Hogie, 424 N.W.2d 630 (N.D.1988); City of Minot v. Knudson, 184 N.W.2d 58 (N.D.1971) ], or in the appeal by the DUI arrestees from judgments of conviction. Section 29-28-06, N.D.C.C.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeals.

VANDE WALLE, C.J., and NEUMANN, SANDSTROM and MESCHKE, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Henry v. SECURITIES COMM'R FOR STATE
2003 ND 62 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2003)
City of Devils Lake v. Alford
2003 ND 56 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2003)
Hughes v. State
2002 ND 28 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2002)
City of Fargo v. Berntson
505 N.W.2d 747 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1993)
City of Fargo v. Stutlien
505 N.W.2d 738 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1993)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
505 N.W.2d 110, 1993 N.D. LEXIS 160, 1993 WL 338603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/johnson-v-raftevold-nd-1993.