Connect with us

North Dakota

Man pleads guilty to downtown Fargo beating death

Published

on

Man pleads guilty to downtown Fargo beating death


FARGO – A responsible plea Wednesday in a downtown Fargo beating dying.

58-year outdated Roberto Garcia plead responsible to manslaughter for the beating dying of 53-year-old Cirilo Contreras again in August.

The bloody assault occurred on a Saturday afternoon at this picnic desk behind the Alerus Financial institution off Broadway.

Prosecutors say they’d been ingesting.

Advertisement

Prosecutors didn’t say how the boys knew one another or what they fought about or if a weapon was used. It was decided Contreas died from a mind damage. He additionally had neck accidents and was lacking quite a few enamel.

“Mr. Garcia struck Mr Contreas a variety of occasions inflicting accidents which finally resulted in Mr Contreas dying,” mentioned Assistant Cass County State’s Lawyer Joshua Traiser.

Contreras’ physique went unnoticed for 14 hours. Two hours after the lethal beating, Garcia went to the bus station a number of blocks away the place a safety guard referred to as an ambulance as Garcia had an injured hand.

Garcia instructed a safety guard on the bus station he was attacked whereas asleep.

Nonetheless, Garcia ran away earlier than the ambulance arrived.

Advertisement

He was arrested a month later in St. Paul.

Earlier this month the court docket ordered Garcia to bear a psychological well being examination. Nonetheless, with the responsible plea that was withdrawn. Prosecutors and his attorneys agreed Garcia will serve 4 years in jail and be on 3 years of supervised probation.

“Mr. Garcia your honor, has stage 3 Cirrhosis of the liver, toxins from the liver can enter the mind and trigger delusions,” mentioned Nicole Bredahl.

Garcia will likely be formally sentenced in March.





Source link

Advertisement

North Dakota

North Dakota bill looks to dissolve gambling oversight commission

Published

on

North Dakota bill looks to dissolve gambling oversight commission


BISMARCK — North Dakota may eliminate its Gaming Commission and place all authority to regulate gambling with the state Attorney General’s Office if a proposed bill moves forward.

The Senate Judiciary Committee on Tuesday gave a do-pass recommendation on

Senate Bill 2224

by a vote of 4-3. The bill seeks to streamline the gambling regulation process by eliminating the state Gaming Commission. Several legislators questioned what benefit the Commission provides, but the gambling industry warned the bill would remove key checks on the attorney general’s power.

Advertisement

The Gaming Commission is an independent entity whose members are appointed by the governor. The Commission acts as an added buffer between the Attorney General’s Office and the Administrative Rules Committee comprised of legislators.

“Gov. Armstrong mentioned all the boards and commissions and things that we have in our state, and how we need to look at which ones are pivotal for the functioning of our government and which ones are not,” Sen. Janne Myrdal, R-Edinburg, the primary sponsor of the bill, said in committee.

Sen. Janne Myrdal, R-Edinburg, asks a question during a hearing on Senate Bill 2224, which focuses on the abolition of the state Gaming Commission, at the North Dakota State Capitol on Tuesday, Jan. 28, 2025.

Tanner Ecker / The Bismarck Tribune

Advertisement

“This came to me from some concerned entities that felt like this particular commission in its duties — which they faithfully execute, obviously — is really a step that we can eliminate in the gaming industry.”

Charitable gambling generated roughly $220 million in revenue in North Dakota as of 2022, and $35 million in tax revenue for the state.

The current flow of gambling regulation in North Dakota starts with the state Attorney General’s Office, which crafts administrative rules regulating the gambling industry. Any proposed rule changes must be looked at by the Gaming Commission, which approves or denies and sends the rules back to the Attorney General’s Office. The Attorney General’s Office then sends the proposed rules to the Administrative Rules Committee where they are finalized and adopted.

North Dakota Director of Charitable Gaming Deb McDaniel said the removal of the Commission would not impact the amount of work the state Attorney General’s Office is responsible for.

“I’ve always worked with the Gaming Commission, and their role is to promulgate the administrative rules … by law,” McDaniel said. “I would just be able to promulgate them without them (the Commission.)”

Advertisement

McDaniel said that while the Commission itself does not hinder the work of her office, it can create situations that do. The Commission must have all five commissioners to meet and approve rules from the Attorney General’s Office. The last time they were able to do so was Jan. 1, 2023.

Since then, there has been at least one vacancy on the Commission — there are currently two — that Gov. Doug Burgum did not fill before leaving office and Gov. Kelly Armstrong has yet to fill.

Until the vacancies are filled, McDaniel is stuck in limbo, unable to make administrative rule changes to regulate the gambling industry.

The gambling industry expressed concern about the elimination of the Commission, saying it provides a beneficial check on the attorney general’s power to govern the industry.

“Our founders knew that it would be a bad idea to give too much power to one single body,” Scott Meske, a lobbyist for the North Dakota Gaming Alliance, said. “That’s kind of what Senate Bill 2224 does; giving 100% of the oversight and regulation to one office. We think the attorney general has done a fine job in overall regulating this industry as it’s grown and changed and morphed over the past few years. But taking away this level of checks and balances is — just sets a very precarious precedent.”

Advertisement

McDaniel said even without the Commission the rules would still need to be finalized by the Administrative Rules Committee, and statute guarantees opportunities for the public — and industry — to provide comment on proposed rule changes.

The bill is expected on the Senate floor Wednesday.





Source link

Continue Reading

North Dakota

Requiring Public Comment Period at Local Meetings Debated in North Dakota State Legislature

Published

on

Requiring Public Comment Period at Local Meetings Debated in North Dakota State Legislature


State Sen. Bob Paulson, R-Minot, testifies in support of a bill during a public hearing at the Capitol on Jan. 24, 2025. (Michael Achterling/North Dakota Monitor)

 

(North Dakota Monitor,  Michael Achterling ) -North Dakota school boards pushed back on a Senate bill that would require public comment periods during regular meetings of local subdivisions.

Sen. Bob Paulson, R-Minot, said he is sponsoring Senate Bill 2180 in response to complaints he’s heard from around the state. Complaints include public comment being limited to once per year at local government meetings or requirements that comments be approved ahead of time or limited to agenda items.

Advertisement

“These things are currently happening in North Dakota and I believe it is incumbent upon us as legislators to protect our constituents’ ability to redress their government at all levels of our state,” Paulson told members of the Senate State and Local Government Committee last week.

An amended version of the original bill would mandate local subdivisions offer a public comment period during regular meetings at least once per month.

The bill states the local subdivision may only limit the public comment period to the time of each speaker or total time of the comment period, but it may not limit the topic of public comments to agenda items of the current meeting.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

North Dakota

Gender-affirming care for minors hangs in balance as North Dakota trial begins

Published

on

Gender-affirming care for minors hangs in balance as North Dakota trial begins


BISMARCK — A court in Bismarck on Monday, Jan. 27 kicked off a trial to decide the fate of North Dakota’s ban on gender-affirming care for minors.

The law, signed by former Gov. Doug Burgum in 2023, makes it a crime for health care professionals to provide gender-affirming treatment to anyone below age 18. The ban contains an exemption for adolescents who had been receiving treatment before it went into effect.

Over the course of the trial, anticipated to take eight days, attorneys will debate whether the law violates personal autonomy and equal protection rights under the state constitution.

The lawsuit is brought by North Dakota pediatric endocrinologist Luis Casas, who is challenging the ban on behalf of himself and his patients.

Advertisement

“This case is not as complicated as it may seem,” Brittany Stewart, an attorney for Gender Justice, said in her opening statement. “All North Dakotans have a right to personal autonomy to make decisions about the health care they need or don’t need to live happy, healthy lives as their authentic selves.”

Previously, the plaintiffs also included three North Dakota families with transgender children. South Central Judicial District Judge Jackson Lofgren

ruled earlier this month

that the families did not have standing to participate in the case because their children were receiving gender-affirming care before the law took effect, and therefore do not fall under the ban.

The families will still testify as witnesses for the plaintiffs.

Advertisement

Doctors and others with expertise providing care to transgender youth, including Casas, also will be called to the witness stand.

The state says the science behind gender-affirming care is not settled and that the ban is needed to protect children.

“The health care law is a constitutional regulation of practice in medicine, in the area of medical uncertainty,” Special Assistant Attorney General Joseph Quinn said in his opening statement for the state. “This is something that the Legislature has the power to do, has the right to do and it has the responsibility to do.”

Experts called by the state will testify that the standards of care are based on emerging, low-quality evidence, Quinn said.

On Monday, one of the children of the three former plaintiff families testified about his experience receiving gender-affirming care in North Dakota. The seventh grader testified under the pseudonym James Doe to protect his identity.

Advertisement

Doe said that today, he lives as a typical 13-year-old. He enjoys spending time with friends, plays football and is a part of the school band.

He knew he was transgender from age 4 or 5, he said.

“I kinda felt more like a boy. I liked Legos more than Barbies, more of my friends were boys,” Doe said.

Though many of his peers accepted him as a boy in elementary school, there were ways his school did not accommodate him. He had accidents because teachers wouldn’t let him use the boys restroom, for example.

After coming out to his family as transgender, he started attending therapy to help with his gender dysphoria, he said.

Advertisement

At age 10, Doe was referred to Casas to discuss gender-affirming treatment. He said that Casas had him wait six months to start puberty blockers.

“He made me go home to think about what I really wanted,” he said.

Doe said he started testosterone treatment at age 13. Similarly, he said Casas urged him and his family to think seriously about the treatment before pursuing it.

“It’s helped me become more comfortable with myself,” Doe said of the treatment. “Medication really makes me who I am today.”

He said he’s had to travel to Moorhead, Minnesota, to receive the treatment from Casas, which has caused him to miss school, extracurriculars and time with friends.

Advertisement

Most of Monday morning and afternoon, the court heard from Daniel Shumer, a pediatric endocrinologist and clinical associate professor of pediatrics for the University of Michigan.

Research indicates that transgender youth who start gender-affirming treatment during the early phases of puberty are happier and healthier than those who start gender-affirming treatment after puberty or during adulthood, he testified.

The way puberty affects the body is significant and irreversible, so being forced to undergo puberty in a way that clashes with their gender identity can be devastating to transgender adolescents, Shumer said.

“It may be nice to say that these are decisions that are best left for adults. The truth of the matter is that puberty happens during adolescence,” he said. “A young person with gender dysphoria is going through a period of time where their body is changing in a permanent way, in a manner that’s opposite to how they know themselves.”

Gender-affirming surgical procedures aren’t performed on adolescents in North Dakota. Shumer also testified that pediatric endocrinologists only prescribe puberty blockers and hormone therapy to adolescents with gender dysphoria, not pre-pubescent minors.

Advertisement

In his questioning of Shumer, Quinn sought to establish that experts have different opinions on

the efficacy of gender-affirming care and whether the risks of providing the medical treatment to adolescents outweigh the benefits. Quinn pointed to several articles where researchers urged caution on the administration of gender-affirming treatment to minors, and called for additional study of the topic.

Quinn asked Shumer if he is aware of any discourse over the legitimacy of the use of gender-affirming medical treatments to treat gender dysphoria.

“Certainly in state courtrooms in the last couple of years,” Shumer replied, though he maintained that the field of pediatric endocrinology has accepted the procedures as valid.

Shumer said that there is a consensus among leading medical associations that hormone therapy is safe and effective to treat gender dysphoria. He also said that the standards of care pediatric endocrinologists use to guide the treatment of adolescents with gender dysphoria are developed based on a review of clinical data.

Advertisement

The state before opening statements asked Lofgren to not allow the former plaintiff families to testify at the trial. Special Assistant Attorney General Daniel Gaustad argued the personal testimony of a few families is not relevant to whether the text of the law is constitutional.

Lofgren denied the request.

Prichard spared from subpoena

The plaintiffs initially had subpoenaed former Rep. Brandon Prichard, a sponsor of the ban during the 2023 session, to testify in the trial. Lofgren on Monday granted a request from the state to block the subpoena because the North Dakota Constitution protects lawmakers from being questioned about their legislative work in court.

Prichard, a Republican who represented the Bismarck area in the state Legislature until losing reelection last year, in a statement to the North Dakota Monitor said he is happy he will no longer be appearing in court, and that he hopes the health care law will stand.

Advertisement

“The trial is over a narrow set of facts and my testimony wouldn’t have provided anything new from what I already discussed in the deposition,” Prichard said. “My expectation was for the plaintiff’s legal team to treat me hostile and try to dig into my time as a legislator, which is privileged.”

Court records show that in a deposition, Prichard said he believes transgender people are “choosing against God.” He also said he suspects scientific research that suggested gender-affirming care is a safe and effective treatment for adolescents with gender dysphoria is fabricated by LGBTQ rights groups.

Attorneys for the plaintiffs have

told the court previously

that even minors who fall under the law’s exemption cannot access gender-affirming care in North Dakota, since medical providers are uncertain how to interpret the law.

Advertisement

The trial is a bench trial, which means Lofgren will issue a verdict.

This story was originally published on NorthDakotaMonitor.com

______________________________________________________

This story was written by one of our partner news agencies. Forum Communications Company uses content from agencies such as Reuters, Kaiser Health News, Tribune News Service and others to provide a wider range of news to our readers. Learn more about the news services FCC uses here.

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending