In the Matter of D.V.A.

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed an order continuing D.V.A.’s commitment as a sexually dangerous individual. The court held that, absent a petition for discharge, D.V.A. had no right to a discharge hearing under N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-18(2), and that the district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to hold a postcommitment hearing under § 25-03.3-17(4).

Holdings

1. In the absence of a petition for discharge, D.V.A. did not have a right to a discharge hearing under N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-18(2).
2. The district court did not abuse its discretion by declining to hold a postcommitment hearing because both the state and independent evaluations concluded that D.V.A. continued to qualify as a sexually dangerous individual.

Questions Presented

1. Whether D.V.A. had a statutory right to a discharge hearing under N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-18(2) absent a petition for discharge.
2. Whether the district court abused its discretion under N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-17(4) by declining to hold a postcommitment hearing.

Disposition

affirmed