Engstrom v. N.D. Department of Transportation, 2011 ND 235

Humann was charged on June 27, 2008 with possession of materials prohibited for images of a minor found on his cell phone.
He pled guilty on February 3, 2009 and was sentenced to five years with all but one year suspended for five years after release.
After serving time, Humann was released on probation with conditions.
On February 22, 2011 the State petitioned to revoke his probation, alleging multiple violations including contacting minors and possessing images, among other misconduct.
At the revocation hearing Humann admitted all allegations; the State sought both probation revocation and mandatory sexual offender registration.
The district court revoked the suspended sentence and ordered Humann to register as a sexual offender; Humann challenged the registration on statutory grounds.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Interpretation of §12.1-32-15(2) on registration	Humann argues the court failed to make required findings and registration was not mandated.	State contends the court's order complied with the statute's requirements.	Statute mandates registration; district court erred in applying (2)(b) but result still required registration.

State v. Rubey, 2000 ND 119 (ND 2000) (statutory interpretation is a question of law fully reviewable on appeal)
State ex rel. K.B. v. Bauer, 2009 ND 45 (ND 2009) (correct result maintained despite district court's flawed reasoning)
Sanders v. Gravel Prods., Inc., 2008 ND 161 (ND 2008) (acknowledges deference to correct outcome under correct legal framework)