North Dakota
West Fargo man found guilty of murdering his wife claims his 6th amendment right was violated during trial
FARGO, N.D. (Valley News Live) – An appellant’s brief filed with the North Dakota Supreme Court is claiming that the 6th amendment was violated in the trial of Spencer Moen, who was found guilty of murdering his wife, Sonja Moen, in October 2024.
Court documents show that Moen and his attorney claim that the district court allowed two minor witnesses to testify remotely via Zoom, from a separate location, without establishing that live testimony would result in serious emotional trauma or without making factual findings to justify the necessity for remote testimony.
The two minor witnesses in question are Moen’s youngest children, who were inside the home at the time of the murder back in August of 2023. Moen’s brief says that “The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution, made applicable to the states through the Fourteenth Amendment, and Article I § 12 of the North Dakota Constitution guarantees the right of an accused in a criminal prosecution to be confronted with the witnesses against him.”
Moen and his attorney are now asking the North Dakota Supreme Court to hear oral arguments and reverse his conviction and remand for a new trial.
The State of North Dakota filed their brief within 30 days of Moen’s filing and states that the 6th amendment was not violated. According to their brief, they claim that the state’s motion to have this one-way testimony by Moen’s children was because “it was unlikely that they would’ve been able to provide trustworthy evidence if they testified in their father’s presence and doing so would harm their psychological well-being.”
On August 9, 2024, the court found that the testimony of the kids in front of Moen would result in them suffering emotional distress or trauma that would impact their ability to speak in front of them.
The State of North Dakota is requesting that the court affirm the criminal judgment against Moen. They have also requested oral arguments to respond to any questions that the Court may have.
Moen was sentenced to life in prison without the possibility of parole on December 30, 2024.
According to the North Dakota Appellate Case System, there are no future hearings scheduled for Moen at this time.
Copyright 2025 KVLY. All rights reserved.
North Dakota
Stampede stay alive with 2-1 OT win in Fargo
FARGO, N.D. (KELO) — The Sioux Falls Stampede staved off elimination with a 2-1 overtime win over the Fargo Force in game four of the USHL Western Conference Finals Saturday night.
Thomas Zocco scored the game-winner 12 minutes into the extra period. Arseni Marchenko put Fargo on the board first in the first period. Noah Mannausau tied the game for the Herd in the second period.
Sioux Falls outshot Fargo 53-49, including 9-5 in overtime. Linards Feldbergs made 48 saves.
Three of the four games of the series have gone to overtime. The winner-take-all game five is Tuesday at the Premier Center.
North Dakota
New ballot measure guide to be mailed to North Dakota voters ahead of election
New ballot measure guide to be mailed to North Dakota voters ahead of election
Kxnet.com
Welcome to the KXMB/KXMC YouTube channel, your home for all news, sports, and weather in western North Dakota. Subscribe to our channel for the latest information, breaking news, and weather updates.
Submit your photos, videos, and news tips to https://www.kxnet.com/report-it/. You can also message us on Facebook.
Visit KX News: https://www.kxnet.com/
Stream our shows here: https://www.kxnet.com/live-streaming/
Download our mobile app: https://www.kxnet.com/apps/
YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/c/KXNewsND?sub_confirmation
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/kxnews
X: https://twitter.com/kxmb
Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/kx_news/
Get our new KXNews+ app on Roku, Apple TV, or Fire TV. Learn more here: https://www.kxnet.com/kx-news-plus/
North Dakota
Federal judge agrees to toss $28M judgment related to Dakota Access Pipeline protests
BISMARCK (North Dakota Monitor) — A federal district court judge indicated he will nullify a nearly $28 million judgment against the federal government related to costs North Dakota incurred during the Dakota Access Pipeline protests so the parties can reach a settlement.
North Dakota is still set to receive a payment Attorney General Drew Wrigley described as satisfactory, but attorneys would not disclose the amount during a Friday hearing.
Attorneys for the United States and North Dakota said the settlement would allow the parties to avoid litigating the case in appeals court,putting the nearly seven-year-old lawsuit to rest.
“We’re hoping we really don’t need to fight any further,” Department of Justice attorney Jonathan Guynn said during the hearing.
The lawsuit, filed in 2019, concerns demonstrations against the construction of the crude oil pipeline, also known as DAPL, that took place in rural south-central North Dakota in 2016 and 2017.
North Dakota claims the federal government caused the protests to grow in size and intensity by unlawfully allowing demonstrators to camp on federal land. The state says it had to pay millions of dollars on policing and cleaning up the encampments as a result. The United States denies the state’s allegations.
North Dakota U.S. District Court Judge Daniel Traynor in April 2025 sided with the state and ordered the executive branch to pay North Dakota the $28 million sum, a decision the U.S. Department of Justice later appealed to the 8th Circuit.
If the settlement moves forward, North Dakota would receive a “substantial monetary payment” from the United States, attorneys said Friday. As a condition of the agreement, the Department of Justice wants Traynor’s judgment and three other orders in which he ruled against the United States to be voided. That includes the court’s 120-page ruling from April 2025.
Both parties said Friday that having the rulings nullified wouldn’t have a significant negative impact on the public, since the documents could still be cited even if they no longer hold the weight of court orders.
At the same time, Guynn said the Department of Justice wants the orders vacated because it doesn’t want the legal conclusions Traynor made to influence the outcome of future lawsuits.
“The downstream consequences of keeping these on the books is troublesome for the United States,” he said during the hearing. If Traynor does not agree to axe the rulings, the United States would likely no longer be willing to settle and move forward with its appeal instead, Guynn added.
Traynor’s orders make findings about the federal government’s responsibility under the Federal Tort Claims Act — the law North Dakota filed the suit under — which the state noted previously in court filings “could have utility holding the federal government to account” in the future.
Still, attorneys for the state said they believe this trade-off is outweighed by the time and money the public would save by not going through the appeals process. North Dakota would also avoid the risk of having Traynor’s judgment overturned by higher courts.
Wrigley said the settlement will be made public once it’s finalized.
The United States’ appeal of Traynor’s decision has been on hold since last summer, when the state and federal government informed the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals they had started settlement negotiations and wished to pause the case.
The 8th Circuit will have to first send the case back to Traynor before he could grant the parties’ requests.
The case went to trial in Bismarck in early 2024. During the four-week trial, the court heard from witnesses including former governors Doug Burgum and Jack Dalrymple, Native activists, federal officials and law enforcement.
The Dakota Access Pipeline carries crude oil from northwest North Dakota to Illinois. It crosses the Missouri River just north of the Standing Rock Sioux Reservation, which prompted the tribe to begin protesting the pipeline on the grounds that it poses a threat to its water supply and sovereignty.
North Dakota’s lawsuit originally requested $38 million in damages from the federal government. Traynor ordered the executive branch to pay $28 million since the U.S. Department of Justice previously gave the state $10 million as compensation for costs it spent related to the protests.
-
Technology1 minute agoDrone delivers 2 pizzas in minutes
-
Business7 minutes agoSweeping California law on single-use plastic meets with outrage from all sides as it goes live
-
Entertainment13 minutes ago‘How I Met Your Mother’ actor Nick Pasqual convicted of attempted murder
-
Lifestyle19 minutes agoWhat is an eye massage? We tried it at this under-the-radar L.A. spot
-
Politics25 minutes ago‘Extremely scary’: Specter of an all-GOP governor’s race spurs push to remake open primary
-
Science31 minutes agoCalifornian exposed to hantavirus aboard cruise ship resides in Bay Area, officials say
-
Sports37 minutes ago‘They punched us in the face.’ Sparks can’t keep pace with Aces in season-opening loss
-
World49 minutes agoTrump says Iran’s reply to US peace plan ‘totally unacceptable’