Summary
The North Dakota Supreme Court granted Eric Smith's petitions for supervisory writs and held that he had a right to a jury trial for violating a Bismarck ordinance regulating the sale of merchandise on public property. Although the offense was classified as an infraction and did not carry a federal constitutional jury-trial right, the court concluded that the North Dakota Constitution preserved a jury-trial right for this type of municipal ordinance violation. The court remanded the matter to the district court for a jury trial.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the Sixth Amendment guarantees a jury trial for an infraction-level violation of a Bismarck ordinance punishable only by a fine.
- Whether Article I, Section 13 of the North Dakota Constitution guarantees a jury trial for an infraction-level Bismarck ordinance violation when comparable municipal regulations carried a jury-trial right under the 1887 Compiled Laws of Dakota Territory.
- Whether Smith's timely written request required transfer of the municipal matter to district court for a jury trial.
- Whether the Supreme Court should exercise supervisory jurisdiction despite the availability of an appeal.
Holdings
- The Sixth Amendment does not guarantee a jury trial for Smith's Bismarck ordinance violation because the offense is a petty offense carrying no possibility of imprisonment and no additional statutory penalty indicating that it is serious.
- Article I, Section 13 of the North Dakota Constitution guarantees Smith a jury trial for the alleged violation of Bismarck City Ordinance § 10-05.1-01.
- Because Smith timely made a written request to transfer the case and exercise his jury-trial right, the matter must be transferred from municipal court to district court for a jury trial.
- The Supreme Court exercised its discretionary supervisory jurisdiction to resolve the jury-trial issue immediately because it involved a vital constitutional right and doing so served the interests of justice and judicial economy.
Key quotations
“Since the offense carries no possibility of a prison term and has no other statutory penalty, it is a petty offense and the defendant has no right to a jury trial under the Sixth Amendment.” (¶ 11)
“Rather than looking to the named categorization of the crime, we must look to the underlying historical nature of the act and the severity of a possible penalty to determine whether the right to a jury trial was preserved for the crime when the state constitution was adopted.” (¶ 21)
“The North Dakota Constitution guarantees Smith the right to a jury trial for a violation of the Bismarck ordinance. We grant the writ of supervision and remand the case back to the district court for a trial by jury.” (¶ 24)
Factual background
Smith operated a stand selling political merchandise promoting a presidential campaign on a boulevard in south Bismarck. The City alleged that he continued selling merchandise after officers informed him that commercial use of public grounds without a permit violated a Bismarck ordinance. The ordinance violation was classified as an infraction punishable by a maximum fine of $1,000, and Smith was convicted after a municipal-court bench trial and fined $100.
Procedural history
The City of Bismarck charged Smith in municipal court with violating an ordinance prohibiting the sale of merchandise on public property without a permit. The municipal court denied Smith's requests to transfer the matter to district court for a jury trial, conducted a bench trial, found him guilty, and imposed a $100 fine. Smith petitioned the North Dakota Supreme Court for supervisory relief; the district court stayed proceedings pending resolution of the petitions.
Remand instructions
The writ of supervision is granted, and the matter is remanded to the district court for a jury trial after transfer from municipal court.