North Dakota – they do things different up there…

Loyal readers, return with us once again to the wilds of North Dakota, that ice-bound region where executives are criminalized for signing off on cookies and balloons at farewell parties, where out-of-control prosecutors deny defendants their constitutional rights, where a boss not from NoDak is pilloried despite turning around a troubled state agency.
Yes, the Sandy Blunt case has reached a new peak of incomprehensibility. Here’s the latest.
Blunt appealed his conviction to the State Supreme Court a year ago, and the case was argued five months ago. One would think that would be plenty of time for the judges to issue a ruling. After all, the Court issued seven opinions so far this year for cases argued in 2010 – two months after Blunt’s hearing.
And while logical minds would think that speedy justice, a right of all citizens conferred in the US Constitution would apply in the frozen north, apparently that is not the case. (See below for the requirements of other courts in North Dakota)
In fact, of the twelve opinions rendered by the North Dakota Supreme Court, not one was argued before Blunt’s – all were argued a month or more after his, yet the Court has not seen fit to issue a ruling in Blunt’s case.
Which leads to the next fascinating bit of NoDak current events.
Reports indicate the attorney who prosecuted Blunt is under investigation by the State Police for potential crimes including conspiracy. What makes this so interesting is that no other media outlet reported this until well after Steve Cates did in his “Dakota Beacon’.
Wait, it gets weirder.
On the day that the State Police announced the investigation into the Assistant State’s Attorney who prosecuted Blunt (Cynthia Feland), there were two other stories that actually did make the news. One would think that they must be big, if they took precedence over an investigation into potential crimes by a Prosecutor. Perhaps a bust of a huge crystal meth lab? Reports of Al Qaeda coming across the border from Canada?
Nope.
Two men, described in the media as “Native Americans” (gotta love that unbiased media…) were caught on video breaking a liquor store window and stealing fifty bucks worth of booze.
Let’s see…I’m the producer of local TV news, got two minutes to fill on the crime blotter…fifty bucks in booze, about four bottles perhaps, against allegations of criminal actions by a county prosecutor…hmmmm, seems like a pretty clear editorial decision to me – let’s slam the Native Americans! Who cares about a law enforcement official accused of conspiracy and suborning justice!
This would actually be pretty funny, even hilarious, if it wasn’t about a prosecutor who allegedly committed crimes in the course of prosecuting one of the most decent, honest, and competent executives I’ve had the honor of meeting in my 25 plus years in the business world.
(Here’s the relevant language from North Dakota’s Judiciary)
Section 1. Statement of Policy.
a. A goal of the judicial system of North Dakota is prompt disposition of cases.
b. The Supreme Court recognizes the need to provide administrative mechanisms within the unified judicial system to maintain current trial court dockets. These trial court docket currency standards and procedures are established to meet this administrative goal.
c. These standards guide the management of the trial courts of North Dakota. However, these court management standards and procedures are not intended and may not form the basis to change or affect the substantive and procedural rights of the parties in any case. Further, a violation of these standards does not cause the dismissal of any case.
d. Adherence to these standards by trial judges requires lawyers to recognize consequent adjustments in local practice. Members of the bar should anticipate the prompt disposition of cases.