Legal Opinion

State v. Vondal

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided March 22, 2011No. 20100221PublishedCited by 6 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

CROTHERS, Justice.

[¶ 1] Richard Raymond Vondal appeals the district court’s order finding he is a sexually dangerous individual and civilly committing him to the care, custody and control of the Department of Human Services. We reverse and remand for the district court to make sufficient findings about whether Vondal has serious difficulties controlling his behavior.

I

[¶ 2] Vondal was incarcerated until March 2008 for his conviction of gross sexual imposition against a fifteen-year-old female. Due to an administrative error, Vondal was not placed on probation when he was released from prison.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Feland v. J.M.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
  2. Coughlin Construction Co. v. Nu-Tec Industries, Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
  3. In the Matter of MidgettNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
  4. In Re AmNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
  5. Rolette County State's Attorney v. L.D.M.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2011

3Cited by6 opinions

  1. State v. NakvindaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  2. State v. GressNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  3. Stokes v. HehnNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  4. Specialized Contracting, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
  5. State v. J.N.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2012

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API