Legal Opinion

Suhr v. Maedche

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided August 31, 2010No. 20090268PublishedCited by 13 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SANDSTROM, Justice.

[¶ 1] Thomas Maedche appeals a district court order involuntarily committing him as a sexually dangerous individual. He argues that North Dakota’s civil commitment statute is void for vagueness and that self-incrimination and due process guarantees preclude the use of his treatment-related disclosures in a civil commitment proceeding. We affirm.

I

[¶ 2] Maedche was convicted of indecent exposure after exposing himself and masturbating in front of a nine-year-old girl during a sleepover at a hotel. After the district court accepted Maedche’s guilty plea, he submitted to sex…

2Cases cited14 opinions

  1. Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
  2. Kansas v. HendricksSupreme Court of the United States · 1997
  3. Kansas v. CraneSupreme Court of the United States · 2002
  4. Allen v. IllinoisSupreme Court of the United States · 1986
  5. Van Grinsven v. G.R.H.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2006

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

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Smestad v. HarrisNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  2. Interest of CormanNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2014
  3. Pember v. ShapiroNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  4. State v. KordonowyNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2015
  5. Grosinger v. J.G.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2013

8 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