2025 ND 24
N.D.2025Background
- Joshua McCleary was charged with multiple felony counts stemming from a string of thefts and burglaries while he was already incarcerated in North Dakota.
- McCleary invoked the Uniform Mandatory Disposition of Detainers Act (UMDDA) to demand a speedy trial while he was still serving a prior sentence.
- He was subsequently paroled from Department of Corrections custody but remained in pretrial custody for the new charges after failing to post bail.
- McCleary moved to dismiss, arguing that the UMDDA’s ninety-day trial period had expired, but the district court denied his motion, holding the statutory period ended once he was paroled.
- He also raised challenges regarding the district court’s handling of his habitual offender status and requested correction of his conditional plea judgment.
Issues
| Issue | McCleary's Argument | State's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does the UMDDA ninety-day trial requirement apply after parole? | UMDDA applied since McCleary was still in custody (though not DOCR). | UMDDA applies only to those imprisoned for another charge; did not apply after parole. | UMDDA does not apply after parole; period ended with release from prison to parole. |
| Proper procedure for habitual offender findings? | Court failed to hold hearing, make findings, or order presentence report. | McCleary stipulated to being a habitual offender and did not request further proceedings. | By stipulation, procedural defects were waived. |
| Should judgment clarify plea was conditional? | Judgment did not state pleas were conditional, correction required. | Judgment made clear pleas were subject to appeal; no correction needed. | No correction required; conditional nature apparent. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Ripley, 548 N.W.2d 24 (N.D. 1996) (UMDDA’s purpose is prompt disposition of charges against inmates)
- State v. Hinojosa, 798 N.W.2d 634 (N.D. 2011) (UMDDA limited to detainers filed against persons imprisoned in a penal institution)
- State v. Moe, 581 N.W.2d 468 (N.D. 1998) (UMDDA applies only to prisoners already incarcerated on another charge)
- State v. Carlson, 258 N.W.2d 253 (N.D. 1977) (UMDDA procedural right not equivalent to a fundamental constitutional right)