State v. Curtis
North Dakota Supreme Court
1Opinion of the Court
VANDE WALLE, Chief Justice.
[¶ 1] Edward Curtis appealed from a judgment of conviction entered upon a jury verdict finding him guilty of theft of property. We affirm, concluding: (1) Curtis’s constitutional right to compel attendance of witnesses was not violated; (2) Curtis’s prosecution was not precluded by the civil dispute doctrine; and (3) the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction.
I
[¶ 2] On October 14, 2005, Curtis opened an account at Northland Educators Federal Credit Union, depositing a $55,540 check drawn on a Canadian bank. After converting the funds under the prevailing…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- United States v. Valenzuela-BernalSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- State v. HartNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1997
- Johnson v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. HilgersNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
- State v. OchoaNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2004
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by7 opinions
- State v. AlvaradoNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. NessNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
- State v. ChatmanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2015
- State v. StridironNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. CurtisNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2009
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.