State v. Burr

[¶ 39] Section 12.1-32-15 should serve the beneficial purposes ascribed to it by the majority. The fact, however, that a law may serve a good purpose does not alone satisfy the inquiry of whether the statute violates the ex post facto clauses of the United States and North Dakota constitutions. Under the circumstances of this case, I would hold that the application to Burr of subsections 3(c) and 117 violates both ex post facto clauses. I would hold so because the statute applied to Burr was retroactive, excessive in its scope, unrestrained in the manner that. information under the statute…