Legal Opinion

State v. Erickson

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 27, 1995No. Cr. 950040PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SANDSTROM, Justice.

We are asked to construe N.D.C.C. § 53-06.1-16.1, dealing with the use of a fraudulent scheme or technique to cheat or skim involving the game of twenty-one (sometimes referred to as “blackjack”). We hold the statute applies to the actions of a twenty-one dealer and affirm the judgment of the district court.

I

Trent Erickson was a twenty-one dealer employed by Red River Human Services at a lounge in Fargo. After noticing the average net proceeds from twenty-one were not what other clubs in the state were making, Red River Human Services employed a private investigator to…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. State v. TweedNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1992
  2. Tooley v. AlmNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  3. State v. KraftNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1987
  4. State v. One Black 1989 Cadillac VIN 1G6DW51Y8KR722027North Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  5. State v. HansonNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1977

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

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. State v. TrosenNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  2. Alerus Financial, N.A. v. Marcil Group Inc.North Dakota Supreme Court · 2011
  3. State v. HuberNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  4. State v. HolecekNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 1996
  5. Wong v. StateNorth Dakota Supreme Court · 2011

3 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