Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

2014 ND 202

State v. Murphy

North Dakota Supreme Court

Decided November 5, 2014

North Dakota Supreme Court · decided 2014-11-05

Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently November 2025

12 state decisions

Relies on State v. Drader

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 2014-11-05

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

VANDE WALLE, Chief Justice,

¶1concurring specially.

¶2[¶ 38] I concur in the result reached in the majority opinion although I am not entirely convinced by the majority’s statutory analysis. However, I agree the statutes are ambiguous and, in this instance, I would include in the majority’s analysis another rule of statutory construction, i.e., the rule of lenity defined by Black’s Law Dictionary 1332 (7th ed.1999) as “[t]he judicial doctrine holding that a court, in construing an ambiguous criminal statute that sets out multiple or inconsistent punishments, should resolve the ambiguity in favor of the more lenient punishment.” See also State v. Drader, 432 N.W.2d 553, 555 (N.D.1988) (holding conditions of probation are to be strictly construed in favor of the offender). Applying the rule of lenity with the other rules of statutory construction, I conclude the trial court does have discretion to suspend a portion of Murphy’s sentence.

/2014/nd/202 · .json · Public domain