State v. Ferderer

Summary

The North Dakota Supreme Court affirmed an order denying Jeremy Ferderer’s motion to compel and answer, which the district court also treated as a request to reconsider denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. The Court held that Ferderer had not timely appealed the amended judgment or the earlier order, found no pending matter supporting a motion to compel, and rejected his double-jeopardy argument concerning probation revocation and resentencing.

Holdings

1. The district court properly denied the motion because no pending matter existed to which a motion to compel could be addressed, and the motion did not provide a cogent basis for reconsidering the earlier denial of the illegal-sentence motion.
2. Revocation of a sentence based on a probation violation and imposition of a greater sentence than originally imposed do not violate double jeopardy.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the district court erred by denying Ferderer's informational motion to compel and answer, including insofar as the motion sought reconsideration of the denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence.
2. Whether revocation of probation and imposition of a greater sentence than originally imposed violated the Double Jeopardy Clause.

Disposition

affirmed