State v. Fee

Annotate this Case

Court Description: A district court judgment forfeiting property connected to criminal activity is affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).



IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2013 ND 232

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Andrew Fee, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20130175

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
v.
Michael Fee, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20130177

Appeal from the District Court of McLean County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Bruce A. Romanick, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Ladd Erickson, State's Attorney, P.O. Box 1108, Washburn, ND 58577-1108, for plaintiff and appellee; submitted on brief.
Andrew Fee, self-represented, 2521 Circle Drive, Jamestown, ND 58401, defendant and appellant; submitted on brief. Michael Fee, self-represented, 2521 Circle Drive, Jamestown, ND 58401, defendant and appellant; submitted on brief.

State v. FeeNos. 20130175 & 20130177

Per Curiam.

[¶1] In consolidated appeals, brothers Andrew and Michael Fee appealed from a district court judgment forfeiting $4,349 in currency, a Desert Eagle handgun, and other miscellaneous property seized by law enforcement. The Fee brothers argue the court erroneously found reasonable grounds existed that the property was connected with criminal activity. "A trial court's decision on whether an item of property is forfeitable is a finding of fact that will not be overturned unless it is clearly erroneous." State v. Bergstrom, 2006 ND 45, ¶ 10, 710 N.W.2d 407. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Carol Ronning Kapsner
Mary Muehlen Maring
Daniel J. Crothers
Dale V. Sandstrom

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.