Thorsrud v. N.D. Dep't of Transportation
2012 ND 136
| N.D. | 2012Background
- Johnston was charged with driving under the influence after a bicycle he rode into a parked car while intoxicated.
- He moved to transfer the case from municipal to district court, which occurred.
- Johnston moved to dismiss, contending a bicycle is not a “vehicle” under NDCC 39-08-01.
- District court denied the motion, and after a reconsideration hearing, denied again.
- Johnston pled guilty conditionally, reserving the right to appeal whether a bicycle is a “vehicle” under the DUI statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether a bicycle is a vehicle under §39-08-01 | City argues bicycle is a vehicle for DUI statute. | Johnston argues human-powered bicycle is not a vehicle. | Bicycle is a vehicle under §39-08-01. |
Key Cases Cited
- State v. Stavig, 2006 ND 63 (ND 2006) (statutory interpretation; de novo review of plain terms)
- City of Bismarck v. Fettig, 1999 ND 193 (ND 1999) (conflict and harmonization of statutes; prefer later provision if irreconcilable)
- Haff v. Hettich, 1999 ND 94 (ND 1999) (conflicts between statutes; specific controls general)
- City of Fargo v. State, 260 N.W.2d 333 (ND 1977) (principles of construction in statutory gaps)
- State v. Beciraj, 2003 ND 173 (ND 2003) (criminal statutes construed in defendant’s favor)