Legal Opinion
State v. Burr
North Dakota Supreme Court
Decided July 29, 1999No. 980272PublishedCited by 65 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SANDSTROM, Justice.
[¶ 1] James A. Burr appeals from the criminal judgment entered upon his conditional plea of guilty to the class A misdemeanor of a failure to comply with convicted sex offender registration. Because his conviction of the underlying sexual offense occurred before sexual offender registration law was enacted, he argues its application to him is ex post facto punishment. We affirm.
I
[¶ 2] On May 11, 1991, James Burr was charged with Gross Sexual Imposition for forcing a 35-year-old woman to engage in a sex act. The charge was reduced to Sexual Imposition, and Burr pled guilty…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Michigan v. LongSupreme Court of the United States · 1983
- Tollett v. HendersonSupreme Court of the United States · 1973
- Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
- Calder v. BullSupreme Court of the United States · 1798
- Ohio v. RobinetteSupreme Court of the United States · 1996
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by65 opinions
- Ward v. StateTennessee Supreme Court · 2010
- State v. BolligWisconsin Supreme Court · 2000
- People v. CastellanosCalifornia Supreme Court · 1999
- Meinders v. WeberSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2000
- Kellar v. Fayetteville Police DepartmentSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1999
60 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.