Matter of Kulink

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Filed 2/25/19 by Clerk of Supreme Court IN THE SUPREME COURT STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 2019 ND 55 In the Matter of Aaron J. Kulink Leah J. Viste, Assistant State’s Attorney, Petitioner and Appellee v. Aaron J. Kulink, Respondent and Appellant No. 20180083 Appeal from the District Court of Cass County, East Central Judicial District, the Honorable Susan L. Bailey, Judge. AFFIRMED. Per Curiam. Leah J. Viste, Assistant State’s Attorney, Fargo, N.D., petitioner and appellee. Tyler J. Morrow, Grand Forks, N.D., for respondent and appellant. Matter of Kulink No. 20180083 Per Curiam. [¶1] Kulink appeals from an order denying discharge from commitment as a sexually dangerous individual. Kulink argues the district court did not make sufficient findings on the “likely to reoffend” element under N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-01(8) or the Crane factor of “serious difficulty controlling behavior.” See Kansas v. Crane, 534 U.S. 407, 412-13 (2002). Additionally, Kulink argues the State did not meet its burden of clear and convincing evidence on the two prongs. This Court retained jurisdiction under N.D.R.App.P. 35(a)(3) and remanded to the district court for further proceedings. See Matter of Kulink, 2018 ND 260, 920 N.W.2d 446. [¶2] The district court issued its Amended Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Order Denying Discharge on December 7, 2018. This Court received additional briefs from both parties. Kulink argues that the petitioner did not present clear and convincing evidence satisfying the Crane factor. We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2). [¶3] Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J. Jerod E. Tufte Daniel J. Crothers Jon J. Jensen Lisa Fair McEvers 1

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.