867 N.W.2d 673
N.D.2015Background
- Etienne charged with simple assault domestic violence under Dickinson Municipal Code § 25.08.010 in March 2013.
- Etienne waived right to counsel and admitted he had been told his rights; he pled guilty on April 4, 2013.
- Municipal court denied his later motion to vacate the guilty plea in May 2014.
- Etienne appealed to the district court under N.D.C.C. § 29-28-06(5); district court affirmed the municipal court decision.
- The issue is whether the district court and this Court have jurisdiction to review the municipal court post-judgment order denying the motion to vacate the guilty plea, given the procedural limits in ND rules and statutes.
- The Court ultimately dismisses the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the court has appellate jurisdiction over the municipal court post-judgment order | City argues district court validly reviewed the order under §29-28-06(5) | Etienne contends jurisdiction exists under 40-18-19 and Rule 37 | No jurisdiction; appeal is dismissed. |
| Whether Etienne’s notice of appeal complied with Rule 37 and related time limits | City contends proper procedures were met under 40-18-19 and Rule 37 | Etienne failed to timely and properly perfect an appeal from the municipal court order | Not timely/permissible; no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. |
Key Cases Cited
- Holbach v. City of Minot, 2012 ND 117 (ND 2012) (discusses appellate jurisdiction and proper method of appeal)
- City of Williston v. Werkmeister, 2015 ND 172 (ND 2015) (limits on appealing municipal court post-judgment orders; interrelation of sections and rules)
- Werkmeister, 2015 ND 172 (ND 2015) (analyzed jurisdictional framework for appeals from municipal court; held lack of right to appeal in some post-judgment scenarios)