rejected adopting various components of the federal rule .
The Court held that a party does not waive attorney-client privilege or the work product doctrine simply by disclosing its owner as its expert witness . The Court held that any communications between Trobadour ’ s counsel and its owner in her capacity as a client are protected by attorney-client privilege . However , the Court also held that the opposing party had the right to all of an expert ’ s information relating to N . D . R . Civ . P . 26 ( b )( 4 ) if done through interrogatories or depositions . As the district court ’ s order called for the production of all communications between Trobadour ’ s counsel and its owner / expert , the Court vacated the portion of the district court ’ s order requiring disclosure of all communications between Trobadour ’ s counsel and its owner .
State v . Vickerman , 2022 ND 184 . Filed 11 / 10 / 22 .
Vickerman was charged with murder . During the jury trial , the district court allowed multiple witnesses to testify about the victim ’ s prior statements that he feared Vickerman may hurt him as a result of several disagreements between the victim and Vickerman . Vickerman was convicted and sentenced to a term of 100 years , with 20 years suspended .
On appeal , Vickerman asserted the district court erred in allowing the hearsay statements of the victim . The Court examined each of the offered statements and determined that each one , although hearsay , was properly admitted under the state of mind exception of N . D . R . Ev . 803 ( 3 ). The victim ’ s statements about being in fear of the defendant were properly admitted under that exception . In addition , admitting such statements did not violate the Confrontation Clause .
Vickerman also argued his sentence of 100 years is greater than his life expectancy and therefore greater than the maximum possible sentence . The maximum penalty for a class AA Felony is life imprisonment without parole . When imposing a life imprisonment sentence , the Court must designate whether the life sentence is imposed with or without the opportunity for parole . If the sentence is life with the opportunity for parole , the sentence means the remaining life expectancy of the offender and the Court is required to compute the life expectancy by reference to a recognized mortality table . After reviewing the judge ’ s statements at the time of sentencing , the Court was uncertain whether the judge was attempting to impose what would effectively be a life sentence . The Supreme Court reversed and remanded for resentencing to clarify whether the judge was attempting to impose a life sentence and , if so , to require the calculation of Vickerman ’ s remaining life expectancy using the mandated mortality table .
We are pleased to announce the opening of our new firm , KING LAW PC !
101 Slate Dr ., Ste . 4 • Bismarck , ND 58503 • 701-712-2676
Over 30 years of litigation experience practicing in the following areas :
• Litigation
• Insurance Law
• Professional Malpractice Defense
• Professional Disciplinary Defense
• Workers Compensation – Employer Representation
• Indian Law
• Tribal Jurisdiction
Licensed in North Dakota , Minnesota , South Dakota , Turtle Mountain Band of Chippewa Indians , Three Affiliated Tribes and Standing Rock Sioux .
Lawrence King
24 THE GAVEL