Denault v. State
2017 ND 167
| N.D. | 2017Background
- In 2000 Denault pleaded guilty in Minnesota to fifth-degree criminal sexual conduct (lewd exhibition) under Minn. Stat. § 609.3451 and later moved to North Dakota.
- North Dakota’s attorney general notified Denault he was required to register as a sexual offender under N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-15(3)(b) based on the out-of-state conviction.
- Denault petitioned the Stutsman County District Court for declaratory relief to vacate the registration requirement and removal from the AG’s public list.
- The State initially failed to respond and later opposed; the district court granted Denault’s petition, concluding the AG had improperly imposed registration (separation-of-powers concern) and exceeded statutory authority.
- The State appealed; the Supreme Court reviewed statutory interpretation, justiciability/declaratory-judgment standards, and whether the Minnesota offense is an "equivalent" North Dakota offense for registration purposes.
- The Supreme Court reversed, holding the statutory duty to register applies without a court order and that the Minnesota offense is equivalent to N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-12.1.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument (Denault) | Defendant's Argument (State) | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether declaratory relief was properly granted to vacate registration | AG unlawfully "imposed" registration; only a judge can impose registration; statute delegation/separation-of-powers violation | Statute itself creates a duty to register for out-of-state convictions; AG administers/implements the statute and may notify offenders | Reversed: court abused discretion; statute imposes registration absent court order |
| Whether N.D.C.C. § 12.1-32-15(3)(b) permits registration based on out-of-state convictions | Registration should not be imposed without judicial sentencing order | Statute explicitly covers convictions in other U.S. courts equivalent to listed offenses; applies even if no judge ordered registration | Held: statute’s plain language imposes duty to register without a court order |
| Whether the district court properly invalidated the statute as unconstitutional (separation of powers) | Court concluded AG action violated separation of powers and declared statute "wholly illegal and void" | State argued Denault failed to raise/brief constitutional attack and that longstanding precedent supports statutory application | Court declined to reach/entertain constitutional invalidation on appeal (issue waived for lack of briefing) |
| Whether Minnesota lewd exhibition statute is "equivalent" to North Dakota exposure/masturbation statute | Denault implied differences (age, mens rea) make it non-equivalent | State argued substantive elements overlap and equivalence need not be identical | Held: Minnesota § 609.3451 and N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-12.1 are equivalent for registration purposes |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Meador, 785 N.W.2d 886 (N.D. 2010) (statutory interpretation principles)
- Ramsey Cty. Farm Bureau v. Ramsey Cty., 755 N.W.2d 920 (N.D. 2008) (declaratory-judgment justiciability and standard of review)
- Nodak Mut. Ins. Co. v. Wamsley, 687 N.W.2d 226 (N.D. 2004) (discretion to grant or deny declaratory relief)
- State v. Nelson, 417 N.W.2d 814 (N.D. 1987) (limits on delegating sentencing authority)
- State v. Saavedra, 406 N.W.2d 667 (N.D. 1987) (delegation and sentencing authority)
- MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Heitkamp, 523 N.W.2d 548 (N.D. 1994) (presumption of constitutionality; judicial restraint in striking statutes)
- State v. Lloyd, 970 N.E.2d 870 (Ohio 2012) (method for comparing out-of-state statute equivalents)