State v. Dennis

2007 ND 87 (N.D. 2007) · Supreme Court of North Dakota · June 7, 2007 · No. No. 20060265

Summary

The Supreme Court of North Dakota considered whether possession of marijuana with intent to deliver within 1,000 feet of a school qualified for the statutory school-zone offense enhancement. The court held that N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23.1(1)(a) enhances only offenses involving the manufacture or distribution of a controlled substance, not possession with intent to deliver. It reversed the judgment and remanded for resentencing as a class B felony.

Holdings

  1. N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23.1(1)(a) provides an offense enhancement for manufacture or distribution of a controlled substance within 1,000 feet of a school, but does not enhance a completed possession-with-intent-to-deliver offense when the defendant had not actually distributed the substance.
  2. The Court will not read possession with intent to deliver into an enhancement provision that expressly identifies manufacture and distribution but omits possession with intent to deliver.

Questions Presented

  1. Whether N.D.C.C. § 19-03.1-23.1(1)(a) enhances a possession-with-intent-to-deliver offense occurring within 1,000 feet of a school.
  2. Whether the statutory terms requiring that the offense involve the manufacture or distribution of a controlled substance include possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver it.
  3. Whether the district court judgment should be reversed and Dennis resentenced under the underlying possession-with-intent-to-deliver statute.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (9)

  • State v. Laib, 2002 ND 95, ¶ 13, 644 N.W.2d 878(followed)
  • Little v. Tracy, 497 N.W.2d 700, 705 (N.D. 1993)(followed)
  • City of Bismarck v. DePriest, 2006 ND 158, ¶ 9, 717 N.W.2d 924(followed)
  • State v. Beciraj, 2003 ND 173, ¶ 14, 671 N.W.2d 250(followed)
  • State v. Rue, 2001 ND 92, ¶ 33, 626 N.W.2d 681(followed)
  • United States v. McKenney, 450 F.3d 39, 42-45 (1st Cir. 2006)(distinguished)
  • United States v. King, 325 F.3d 110, 113 (2d Cir. 2003)(discussed)
  • United States v. Alexander, 331 F.3d 116, 131 (D.C. Cir. 2003)(discussed)
  • United States v. Contreras, 895 F.2d 1241, 1244 (9th Cir. 1990)(discussed)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…