IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I. DECISIONS REVISED BY THIS ORDER

Similar documents
SUPREME COURT COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS, Plaintiff-Appellee, NESTOR TAITANO, OPINION

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. ROBERT WALTER SHAFFER, JR; SHAFFER, GOLD & RUBAUM, LLP, Petitioners,

fjl ,_::_';; 28 AID : I " CLERK OF COURT SUPREME COURT CNMI FILED FOR PUBLICATION ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

By Order of the Court, Judge TERESA KIM-TENORIO

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I. INTRODUCTION

Argued and Submitted on August 24, Counsel for Appellee: John Biehl (Carlsmith Ball Wichman Case & Ichiki), Saipan.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

SUPREME COURT COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS, Plaintiff/Appellant,

Plaintiff-Appellee, CARMELITA M. GUIAO, Defendant-Appellant. Supreme Court No SCC-0002-CRM Superior Court No

SUPREME COURT COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. APLUS CO., LTD, Plaintiff Counterclaim Defendant/Appellee,

By Order of the Court, Judge Joseph N. Camacho

PROCEDURAL HISTORY AND FACTUAL BACKGROUND

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

FOR PUBLICATION. Appeal No GA IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE. Defendant Below, Appellant, Nos. 516 and 525, 2000

APPELLATE COURT NO. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. In Re: KENT E. HOVIND. Petition for Writ of Mandamus from the

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I. INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS COMMONWEAL TH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS, Plaintiff-Appellee

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Plaintiff-Appellant. Defendant-Appellee

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. STANLEY T. MCGINNIS TORRES, Plaintiff-Appellee,

FOR PUBLICATION. Appeal No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

Supreme Court of Florida

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

Plaintiff-Appellee, JIN SONG LIN, Defendant-Appellant. Supreme Court No SCC-0008-CRM Superior Court No OPINION

Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MICHAEL MURPHY, Defendant-Appellee, ELIZABETH WEINTRAUB, Intervenor-Appellant.

No SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. Joseph Jones, Desmond Thurston, and Antuwan Ball Petitioner- Appellants,

2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14984, * DARBERTO GARCIA, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Respondent. 04-CV-0465

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I. INTRODUCTION

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

In The Supreme Court of the United States

Appeal No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Foreign Aid for Antitrust Litigants: Impact of the Intel Decision By Richard Liebeskind, Bryan Dunlap and William DeVinney

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No D.C. Docket No. 4:13-cr HLM-WEJ-1. versus

) DECISION AND ORDER ) GRANTING DEFENDANT'S ) MOTION TO DISMISS ) )

Supreme Court of the United States

Case: , 06/11/2015, ID: , DktEntry: 36-1, Page 1 of 5 NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

; DECISION AND ORDER ON

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS IN RE SMALL CLAIMS FORMS SUPREME COURT NO.

Chart 12.7: State Appellate Court Divisions (Cross-reference ALWD Rule 12.6(b)(2))

Case 3:09-cv ARC Document 17 Filed 05/03/2010 Page 1 of 7 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

THE DISTRICT COURT CASE

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS Plaintiff-Appellee,

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No P. versus. WARDEN, Respondent Appellee.

IN THE SUPERIOR COURt\': FOR THE COMMONWEAL TH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I. INTRODUCTION

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 9:07-cr DPG-2.

) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Argued July 30, Douglas F. Cushnie P.O. Box 949 Saipan, MP 96950

"/ f. 1. On October 1, 2015, Plaintiff and Defendant (and his wife) entered into a contract for a FOR PUBLICATION ) ) ) ) ) )

In the Supreme Court of the United States

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA ) ) v. ) Criminal Number: P-H ) DUCAN FANFAN )

No GIOVANNA SETTIMI CARAFFA, as personal representative of the Estate of BENEDETTO EMANUELLE CARAFFA, Petitioner, v.

Anita Hernandez CARILLO

2. Civil Procedure - Motions -

NOT FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Argued and submitted December 9, DEMAPAN, Chief Justice, CASTRO, Associate Justice, and TAYLOR, Justice Pro Tem.

In the United States Court of Appeals

In The Supreme Court Of The United States

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No JEWEL SPOTVILLE, VERSUS

Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

Follow this and additional works at:

SUPREME COURT OF ARIZONA En Banc

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. ) ) v.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA

Case: 1:10-cv Document #: 22 Filed: 01/25/11 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:316

TENTH CIRCUIT ORDER AND JUDGMENT * On October 20, 2006, Jonearl B. Smith was charged by complaint with

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) I.

) ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT'S ) MOTION TO DISMISS COUNT II AS IT ) IS MULTIPLICITOUS AND VIOLATES v. ) THE CONSTITUTIONAL PROTECTION. ) Defendant.

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM. PEOPLE OF GUAM Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. EDWIN V. ALISASIS Defendant-Appellant. OPINION. Filed: July 25, 2006

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Brown, J. This court granted discretionary review of Deborah Daily s driving

The Edge M&G s Intellectual Property White Paper

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT. No In re: MARTIN MCNULTY,

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA ATLANTA DIVISION

SUPREME COURT, STATE OF COLORADO. Ralph L. Carr Judicial Center 2 East 14 th Avenue Denver, Colorado 80203

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Respondents. I.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

MODEL CRIMINAL JURY INSTRUCTIONS COMMITTEE REPORTER S ONLINE UPDATE. Updated September 3, Introduction

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT FOR THE COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. l l L INTRODUCTION. n. BACKGROUND

Case No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT. RUMEI HUANG, Petitioner, LORETTA LYNCH, ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT. No Non-Argument Calendar. D.C. Docket No. 9:08-cv DTKH.

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiff, Defendants.

Case 2:08-cv LED-RSP Document 474 Filed 08/05/13 Page 1 of 7 PageID #: 22100

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF GUAM. PEOPLE OF GUAM, Plaintiff-Appellee, vs. GABRIEL LAU, Defendant-Appellant. OPINION. Filed: July 2, 2007

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES TREVON SYKES, PETITIONER UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. vs. Appeal No District Court Docket Number 1:03-cr-129 JIM RICH Appellant.

Transcription:

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE FIt E D en M I SUPR f. ME, COUR DATE: (.D ['WI( COMMONWEALTH OF THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS BY: -- \0 11 IN THE MATTER OF DECISIONS TO BE PUBLISHED IN NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS REPORTER, VOLUME SEVEN. ERRATA ORDER 11-000-HSC \ PER CURIAM: \ I. DECISIONS REVISED BY THIS ORDER The decisions listed below, all styled as opinions, require substantive revision. They are hereby revised by changes as set forth in section two of this order. The published decisions containing all revisions shall constitute the final versions of the decisions. ] 1. Commonwealth v. Taitano, 0 MP. Kevin In! '[ Corp. v. Superior Court, 0 MP. Liu v. CNMJ, 0 MP. Sattler v. Mathis, 0 MP. Commonwealth v. Pua, 0 MP 1. Bank of Saipan v. Martens, 0 MP. Commonwealth v. Milliondaga, 0 MP. Tan v. Younis, 0 MP 11. Estate of Muna v. Commonwealth, 0 MP -I

. Commonwealth v. Bias, 0 MP. REVISIONS 1. Commonwealth v. Taitano, 0 MP -,r shad read as follows:... the trial court must consider the factors set forth in United States v. Cook, 0 F.d 1, 1 n. (th Cir. 1 (en bane. (continuation omitted.. Kevin Int" Corp. v. Superior Court, 0 MP Supreme Court Original Action Number shall read as follows: 11 1 Supreme Court Original Action No. 0-000-GA. Attorneys of Record shall read as follows: For Plaintiff-Petitioner: Viola Alepuyo, Saipan. For Defendant-Real Party in Interest: Steven Carrara, Saipan.. Liu v. CNMI, 0 MP 'if shall read as follows: 1 -,r... The Petitioner cites Unites States v. Fanfan, 0 WL 1, 0 U.S. Dist. 1 LEXIS (D.Me. June, 0... Petitioner likens the grant of certiorari in Fan/an, which sought to review the effects of the Blakely v. Washington, U.S. (0... the Blakely decision... (continuation omitted.. Sattler v. Mathis, 0 MP -,r shall read as follows: -,rs Looking beyond our own decisions, to those we have relief on in the past, is more helpful. Our precedent stems primarily from an Idaho case, Krebs v. Krebs, P.d (1 (discussed below, and from a Ninth Circuit decision, Us. v. McConney, F.d 11 (th Cir. 1. (continuation omitted. S. Commonwealth v. Pua, 0 MP 1 -,r shall read as follows: -,rio Aside from the fact that the Attorney General did not "certif[y] to the Superior Court that the appeal is not taken for purpose of delay and that the evidence is a substantial proof of --

a fact material in the proceeding" - which will not necessarily defeat jurisdiction, see U.S. v. Becker, F.d, ( th Cir. 1 1 (finding that failure to certify pursuant to analogous federal statute is correctable at the court's discretion - this statute is clearly inapplicabje to the present case. (continuation omitted.. Commonwealth v. Pua, 0 MP 1, shall read as follows:, Furthennore, we are not the first court to find mandamus jurisdiction may be accorded even when appellate jurisdiction is lacking. In u.s. v. Barker, 1 F.d, ( t h to 1 Cir. 1, the Ninth Circuit held that where the Government had plead in the alternative for 1 jurisdiction pursuant to U.S.c. 1 (the federal analog to our CMC 1, or mandamus relief, even though no jurisdiction could be had under U.S.C. 1, mandamus relief was still available due to the gravity of issue. See also u.s. v. Col/amore, F.d, 0 (1 st Cir. 1 (holding similarly that mandamus was proper when U.S.c. 1 1 1 jurisdiction was questionable. (continuation omitted.. Bank ojsaipan v. Martens, 0 MP, shall read as follows:,... The question in each case is whether under all the circumstances the remedy was pursued with reasonable dispatch. See McDaniel v. Us. Dist. Court, F.d, 0 n.l ( th Cir. 1 (Rymer, Circuit Judge, concurring, citing United States v. Olds, F.d ( rd Cir.». (continuation omitted.,. Commonwealth v. Milliondaga, 0 MP, shall read as follows:... Two provisions are not the same offense if each contains an element not included in the other. Hudson v. United States, U.S., (1 (Stevens, 1. concurring. (continuation omitted.. Tan v. Younis, 0 MP 11, shall read as follows: --

So strong is the Constitutional protection of free expression that it even contemplates and protects a degree of abuse. "[E]rroneous statement is inevitable in free debate, and... it must be protected if the freedoms of expression are to have the 'breathing space' that they 'need to survive.'" Brown v. Hartlage, U.S., 0, S. Ct. 1, 1 L. Ed. d (1 (citations omitted. Indeed, "[ s lome degree of abuse is inseparable from the proper use of every thing; and in no instance is this more true than in that of the press_" New York Times, U.S. at 1 (quoting James Madison, Elliot's Debates on the Federal 1 Constitution 1 (».. Estate of Muna v. Commonwealth, 0 MP 1 shall read as follows:,1 The Fifth Amendment of the United States Constitution and the Constitution of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands Constitution require that when private property is taken for public use by eminent domain, "just compensation" must be provided to 1 1 the owner. Kirby Forest Indus., Inc. v. United States, U.S. 1, (1. 11. Commonwealth v. Bias, 0 MP, shall read as follows: The Commonwealth charged BIas with vehicular homicide, reckless driving, and driving under the influence of alcohol. On October, 0, the jury heard the vehicular homicide charge, while the trial court heard the reckless driving and driving under the influence charges. On November, 0, the jury returned a verdict acquitting BIas on the vehicular homicide charge, but the trial court found him guilty of reckless driving and driving under the influence of alcohol. BIas timely appealed. SO ORDERED. Entered this ay k of 11. --

PAN, CHIEF JUSTICE 1 1 1 I - --