State v. Buller
2011 ND 1
| N.D. | 2011Background
- T.O. was civilly committed as a sexually dangerous individual in 2005.
- In February 2010, T.O. petitioned for discharge to review status.
- State expert and independent expert conducted psychological examinations with conflicting conclusions.
- In August 2010 a hearing was held; evidence included testimony and reports from both experts.
- The district court entered an order finding by clear and convincing evidence that T.O. remains sexually dangerous.
- This Court reverses and remands because the district court failed to make sufficient findings of fact under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Are the district court's findings sufficient under Rule 52(a)? | T.O. argues insufficient findings to review. | State asserts evidence supports the order and should be affirmed. | Findings were insufficient; reverse and remand for proper findings. |
Key Cases Cited
- In re R.A.S., 2008 ND 185 (N.D. 2008) (detailed findings required; credibility and evidentiary basis must be stated)
- In re J.S., 2001 ND 10 (N.D. 2001) (emphasizes need for specific findings and evidentiary basis)
- Madison v. North Dakota Dep’t of Transp., 503 N.W.2d 243 (N.D. 1993) (reversal for systemic disregard of law where appropriate)