Court Opinion

ID: 9386643
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-04-13 14:05:06.748158+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:18:07.486546
License: Public Domain

FILED
                                                                       IN THE OFFICE OF THE
                                                                    CLERK OF SUPREME COURT
                                                                           MARCH 31, 2023
                                                                     STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

   Corrected Opinion Filed 04/05/23 by Clerk of the Supreme Court

                  IN THE SUPREME COURT
                  STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

                                 2023 ND 56

The State of North Dakota,                             Petitioner and Appellee
      v.
K.J.A., a Minor Child;                              Respondent and Appellant
      and
R.A., mother; B.S., father,                                       Respondents

                                No. 20220286

Appeal from the Juvenile Court of Billings County, Southwest Judicial District,
the Honorable Dann E. Greenwood, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Opinion of the Court by Jensen, Chief Justice.

Olivia L. Krebs, Assistant State’s Attorney, Dickinson, ND, for petitioner and
appellee.

Benjamin C. Pulkrabek, Mandan, ND, for respondent and appellant.
                               State v. K.J.A.
                               No. 20220286

Jensen, Chief Justice.

[¶1] K.J.A. appeals from a juvenile court denial of his petition for early
destruction of records. K.J.A. argues the juvenile court erred in concluding
N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-04 precluded the court from destroying the records because
N.D.R.Juv.P. 19(e) governs and permits the court to destroy juvenile records
early for good cause. We conclude N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-04 prohibits the
destruction of the records at issue and we affirm.

[¶2] In 2020 a juvenile petition was filed asserting K.J.A. was a delinquent
child pursuant to N.D.C.C. § 27-20-02(7), now N.D.C.C. § 27-20.2-01(8). K.J.A.
was found to be a delinquent child and to have violated N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-12,
N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-03(1)(d), and N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-03(2)(a). In 2022 K.J.A.
petitioned the court for early destruction of records. The court denied the
petition, concluding N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-04 precluded the court from destroying
records when the alleged violation was a violation defined in N.D.C.C. § 12.1-
20 or N.D.C.C. § 12.1-27.2.

                                       I

[¶3] K.J.A. argues the juvenile court erred in concluding N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-
04 precluded the court from destroying the records because N.D.R.Juv.P. 19(e)
governs and permits the court to destroy juvenile records early for good cause.
We have outlined the framework this Court applies when reviewing a juvenile
court order:

      Under N.D.R.Civ.P. 52(a), this Court reviews a juvenile court’s
      factual findings under a clearly erroneous standard of review, with
      due regard given to the opportunity of the juvenile court to judge
      the credibility of the witnesses. A finding of fact is clearly
      erroneous if there is no evidence to support it, if the reviewing
      court is left with a definite and firm conviction that a mistake has
      been made, or if the finding was induced by an erroneous view of
      the law. This Court reviews questions of law de novo.

                                       1           Filed by Clerk of Supreme Court 04/05/23
In re D.O., 2013 ND 247, ¶ 6, 840 N.W.2d 641 (quotations omitted) (quoting
Interest of R.A., 2011 ND 119, ¶ 4, 799 N.W.2d 332).

[¶4] The juvenile court determined N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-04 controlled with
regard to the specific records at issue and precluded the court from destroying
the records under N.D.R.Juv.P. 19(e). Section 25-03.3-04, N.D.C.C., provides:

      Notwithstanding any other provision of law, all adult and juvenile
      case files and court records of an alleged offense defined by
      chapters 12.1-20 and 12.1-27.2 must be retained for twenty-five
      years and made available to any state’s attorney for purposes of
      investigation or proceedings pursuant to this chapter. If the
      subject of a case file or court record has died before the expiration
      of the twenty-five-year period, the official, department, or agency
      possessing the case files and records shall maintain the case files
      and records in accordance with the case file and records retention
      policies of that official, department, or agency. For purposes of this
      section, “adult and juvenile case files” mean the subject’s medical,
      psychological, and treatment clinical assessments, evaluations,
      and progress reports; offenses in custody records; case notes; and
      criminal investigation reports and records.

Rule 19(e), N.D.R.Juv.P., provides:

      (e) Early Destruction of Records. A party who is the subject of a
      delinquency or unruly proceeding may petition the court for early
      destruction of records. The state’s attorney of the county in which
      the records are held must be notified of the request. The judge may
      order the early destruction upon a showing of good cause to destroy
      the records by the party. The records may not be destroyed if it is
      known that the subject of the motion has criminal charges pending
      before any other court.

[¶5] We have noted the following when interpreting a substantive statute and
a court-promulgated procedural rule:

            Our court has authority under Art. VI, § 3, of the North
      Dakota Constitution, to promulgate “rules of procedure” to be
      followed by all the courts of this state. When the issue could be said
      to involve a matter that entwines procedure with substantive law,

                                        2
      we will respect the clearly expressed intent of the Legislature
      when to do so will not compromise or unreasonably impede justice.

Schempp-Cook v. Cook, 455 N.W.2d 216, 217 (N.D. 1990).

[¶6] Section 25-03.3-04, N.D.C.C., is a substantive statute requiring retention
of records when the alleged offense was a violation of N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20 or
N.D.C.C. § 12.1-27.2. Precluding a court from destroying juvenile records early
when the alleged offense(s) are defined in N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20 and N.D.C.C. §
12.1-27.2 will not compromise or unreasonably impede justice. Therefore, we
will respect the Legislature’s clear intent to require retention of records as
provided for in N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-04.

[¶7] K.J.A. was found to have violated N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-12, N.D.C.C. § 12.1-
20-03(1)(d), and N.D.C.C. § 12.1-20-03(2)(a). All three offenses are defined by
chapter 12.1-20 and are subject to N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-04. Therefore, K.J.A.’s
records relating to this case must be maintained for twenty-five years and
cannot be destroyed early. The juvenile court did not err as a matter of law in
concluding N.D.C.C. § 25-03.3-04 precludes the court from destroying records
early under N.D.R.Juv.P. 19(e).

                                      II

[¶8] The juvenile court did not err in denying the petition. We affirm the
juvenile court’s denial of K.J.A.’s petition for early destruction of records.

[¶9] Jon J. Jensen, C.J.
     Daniel J. Crothers
     Lisa Fair McEvers
     Jerod E. Tufte
     Douglas A. Bahr

                                      3