State v. Mayer

2011 ND 210
CourtNorth Dakota Supreme Court
DecidedNovember 15, 2011
Docket20110058
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 2011 ND 210 (State v. Mayer) 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
State v. Mayer, 2011 ND 210 (N.D. 2011).

Opinion

Filed 11/15/11 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2011 ND 208

In the Matter of L.D.M.

Lisa B. Gibbens,

Rolette County

State’s Attorney, Petitioner and Appellee

v.

L.D.M., Respondent and Appellant

No. 20110110

Appeal from the District Court of Rolette County, Northeast Judicial District, the Honorable Laurie A. Fontaine, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Lisa Beckstrom Gibbens (argued), State’s Attorney, P.O. Box 1079, Rolla, ND 58367-1079, petitioner and appellee.

William Robert Hartl (argued), P.O. Box 319, Rugby, ND 58368-0319, for respondent and appellant.

Matter of L.D.M.

[¶1] L.D.M. appeals a district court order denying his petition for discharge and continuing his commitment as a sexually dangerous individual.  He argues the State did not prove he remains a sexually dangerous individual by clear and convincing evidence.  We affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2), concluding the district court’s finding L.D.M. remains a sexually dangerous individual was not clearly erroneous.

[¶2] L.D.M. also argues that the North Dakota State Hospital treatment requirements violate his Fifth Amendment right against self-incrimination and that he is not receiving “the least restrictive available treatment” as required by N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-13.  In 2009, L.D.M. pled guilty to criminal mischief for destroying State Hospital property.  He was sentenced to four years of incarceration at the North Dakota State Penitentiary where he is an inmate.  L.D.M. is not currently being treated at the State Hospital.  Because issues surrounding L.D.M.’s treatment at the State Hospital are not ripe for review, we dismiss those claims.   See Interest of C.W. , 453 N.W.2d 806, 810 (N.D. 1990).

[¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Daniel J. Crothers

Mary Muehlen Maring

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Dale V. Sandstrom

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

Related

Matter of L.D.M.
2011 ND 208 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
2011 ND 210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-mayer-nd-2011.