Interest of D.V.A.

Annotate this Case

Court Description: A district court order denying discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual is summarily affirmed under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).



IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2017 ND 39

In the Interest of D.V.A.
-------------
Julie Lawyer, Assistant State's Attorney, Petitioner and Appellee
v.
D.V.A., Respondent and Appellant

No. 20160315

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Gail Hagerty, Judge.
AFFIRMED.
Per Curiam.
Ryan A. Keefe, Assistant State's Attorney, Burleigh County Courthouse, 514 E. Thayer Ave., Bismarck, ND 58501, for petitioner and appellee; submitted on brief.
Kent M. Morrow, 103 S. Third St., Ste. 6, Bismarck, ND 58501, for respondent and appellant; submitted on brief.

Interest of D.V.A.No. 20160315

Per Curiam.

[¶1] D.V.A. appeals from an order denying his application for discharge from civil commitment as a sexually dangerous individual. D.V.A. argues the district court erred in denying his application for discharge because the order is not supported by sufficient evidence that he continues to be a sexually dangerous individual under N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-01(8). We conclude the district court's findings of fact are supported by clear and convincing evidence, and we summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶2] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.
Lisa Fair McEvers
Daniel J. Crothers
Jerod E. Tufte
Carol Ronning Kapsner

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.