Need more? Try out  Advanced Search (20+ criteria)»

logo

Last Update

This profile was last updated on 12/22/2010 and contains contributions from the  Zoominfo Community.

is this you? Claim your profile.

Wrong Cynthia Feland?

Cynthia M. Feland

State's Attorney

North Dakota Department of Transportation

HQ Phone:  (701) 328-4905

Direct Phone: (701) ***-****direct phone

GET ZOOMINFO GROW

+ Get 10 Free Contacts a Month

Please agree to the terms and conditions.

I agree to the  Terms of Service and  Privacy Policy. I understand that I will receive a subscription to ZoomInfo Grow at no charge in exchange for downloading and installing the ZoomInfo Contact Contributor utility which, among other features, involves sharing my business contacts as well as headers and signature blocks from emails that I receive.

THANK YOU FOR DOWNLOADING!

computers
  • 1.Download
    ZoomInfo Grow
    v sign
  • 2.Run Installation
    Wizard
  • 3.Check your inbox to
    Sign in to ZoomInfo Grow

I agree to the Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. I understand that I will receive a subscription to ZoomInfo Community Edition at no charge in exchange for downloading and installing the ZoomInfo Contact Contributor utility which, among other features, involves sharing my business contacts as well as headers and signature blocks from emails that I receive.

North Dakota Department of Transportation

600 E Boulevard Ave # 101

Bismarck, North Dakota,58505

United States

Background Information

Employment History

State's Attorney

Burleigh County


Contributor

KXMB


Contributor

KXMC


Contributor

KXMA


Affiliations

Forensic Medical Examination Multidisciplinary Working Group

Member of the Advisory Board


Dakota Children's Advocacy Center

Member of the Advisory Board


Big Muddy Bar Association

Member


BAR OF THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

Member


Education

UND School of Law


University of North Dakota


Web References(199 Total References)


Our team at DCAC

www.medcenterone.com [cached]

*Cynthia Feland, Burleigh County State's Attorney


ND SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY BOARD RECOMMENDS SUSPENSION OF JUDGE CYNTHIA FELAND | The Dakota Beacon

dakotabeacon.com [cached]

ND SUPREME COURT DISCIPLINARY BOARD RECOMMENDS SUSPENSION OF JUDGE CYNTHIA FELAND
Judge Romanick, Sandy Blunts trial judge (left) who worked with Prosecutor Feland in the Burliegh County State's Attorney's office, Cynthia Feland (center) now judge, Richard Riha (right) Cynthia Feland's boss during the Blunt trial Judge Romanick, Sandy Blunts trial judge (left) who worked with Prosecutor Feland in the Burliegh County State's Attorney's office, Cynthia Feland (center) now judge, Richard Riha (right) Cynthia Feland's boss during the Blunt trial "3. The Panel concludes Cynthia M. Feland did not disclose to Michael Hoffman, defense attorney for Charles Blunt, the Wahl memo, and other documents which were evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tended to negate the guilt of the accused of mitigate the offense." "The Hearing Panel recommends to the North Dakota Supreme Court that Cynthia M. Feland be SUSPEDED from the practice of law for sixty (60) days and that she be ORDERED to pay the costs of the disciplinary proceeding in the amount of $11,272.21."


THE PREVARICATING PROSECUTOR VI: MISLEADING THE MEDIA OVER WITHHOLDING EXCULPATORY EVIDENCE | The Dakota Beacon

dakotabeacon.com [cached]

Cynthia Feland
Assistant State's Attorney Feland did not provide the memo to Sandy Blunt or his defense attorney Michael Hoffman. Paduda's article of January 12, 2010 "Fact Checking - North Dakota Style", puts the spotlight on the Blunt affair with the brightest light focused on prosecutor Cynthia Feland, providing a succinct summary of the situation in saying: Turns out that the prosecutor who brought the charges, Cynthia Feland, knew that failing to collect the moving expenses was not a crime - yet she brought charges anyway. She had in writing that the ND Attorney General advised state auditors in October of 2006 that the exec did not voluntarily leave and thus there was no legal authority to collect. This fact was then put in writing to Feland a year before the trial and she Assistant State's Attorney Feland responded in a manner that did not clarify. Prevarication never clarifies. ---------------------------------------------------- January 12, 2010, Joe PADUDA to Cynthia Feland, Subject: Blunt case and the Wahl memo Thus, the assertion by Feland's is nothing more than the textbook definition of assertion "Something declared or stated positively, often with no support or attempt at proof. "(The American Heritage® Dictionary) ... and Feland and her co-counsel Lloyd Suhr claim that this memo had no relevance to any issues in the case? Really? And what gave Feland the right to withhold a key document that could have been used by Hoffman while questioning its author on the witness stand (a document that would have impeached Wahl's actual testimony and credibility as a witness)? So ... even though Feland and Suhr never gave Blunt a copy of Wahl's memo --clearly exculpatory evidence-- any legitimate and legal concerns raised regarding the withholding of the memo amounts to nothing more that an "after the fact rationalization made up in an attempt to create an excuse for being convicted?" Regardless of Feland and Suhr's attempted after the fact rationalizations to justify securing a conviction while willfully not adhering to their ethical and legal obligations to have provided the memo in-whole to Blunt prior to the trial (especially when reviewed in context to the information above), the memo was a critical piece of evidence in the case and would have had a substantial affect on the outcome of the trial. Ms Feland - I re-read your response and my query below, and realize I may have been less than clear. On August 28, 2009, Hoffman wrote to Feland "I did not have this memo at the time of the trial of this case, and you had not produced this memo in discovery or in response to my request for material under Brady v. Maryland. On January 14, 2010, I wrote Hoffman and asked "Was the November 8, 2007 memorandum written by Jason Wahl, auditor of the North Dakota State Auditor's Office addressed to Burleigh County Assistant State's Attorney Cynthia Feland concerning the separation from North Dakota Workforce Safety and Insurance of Mr. David Spencer provided to Mr. Charles Blunt or yourself prior to the December 2008 trial of Mr. Blunt? Here, Feland is apparently not sure which story works best so she takes two paths: 1) we disclosed all the relevant information in the memo to the defense thereby making the memo itself irrelevant; and 2) there was so, so much discovery that we can not find the exact date we provided the memo but I assure you that we did provide the memo in whole to the defense. Neither the law nor Feland's and Suhr's professional standards care about "why" the information was withheld just that it WAS withheld: "The harm to a defendant in instances of nondisclosure is not alleviated merely because a prosecutor made a good-faith error in judgment or was simply negligent in meeting the Brady requirements." And even if Brady and all of its clarifying case law was not enough, Feland and Suhr were given numerous reminders/opportunities by Hoffman to turn everything over. On April 19, 2007, Hoffman filed a Request For Discovery and Request For Notice of Prosecution's Intention To Use Evidence with Feland that stated (in part): "Pursuant to Rule 12(d)(2), NDRCrimP, Defendant, in order to afford an opportunity to raise objections to evidence prior to trial under Rule 12(b)(3), NDRCrimP, hereby requests notice of the prosecution's intention to use in its evidence in chief at trial any evidence to which Defendant is entitled to discovery under Rule 16, NDRCrimP, subject to any relevant limitations prescribed in Rule 16. ... Continuing duty to disclose: If, before or during trial, the prosecution discovers additional evidence or material previously requested or ordered which is subject to discovery or inspection under Rule 16, the prosecution shall promptly notify Defendant or the Court of the existence of the additional material." "I contacted (Cynthia) Feland several times over the last few weeks, asked her directly about this situation, and she refused to address the key question - had she provided Blunt with a copy of the State Auditor's memo which cleared Blunt of any malfeasance related to Spencer?... Cynthia Feland NEVER answered the Paduda's question! Because she broke the law? What is not truly divined though from Paduda's quick reference above, are the lengths to which Feland is willing to go to obfuscate and pervert the actual facts associated with her persecution of Blunt.


STEVE CATES: LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS - LEFTIST ACTIVISTS - PERCEPTION MANIPULATORS? | The Dakota Beacon

dakotabeacon.com [cached]

When Cynthia Feland ran for the office of Judge for North Dakota's South Central District I believed (and still do) her to have made numerous false statements in several legal proceedings.
So, upon hearing that the Bismarck-Mandan League of Women's Voters were to have a "Candidate Forum" I decided to ask a question of her and the other judgeship candidate.


STEVE CATES: NATIONAL WORKMENS' COMP LEADERS TELL AMERICAN BUSINESSES ABOUT TRAVESTY IN N.D. | The Dakota Beacon

dakotabeacon.com [cached]

The second and more serious charge, involving the sick pay and moving expenses of employee Spencer, has been fatally undermined by therevelation that the prosecutor in the matter, Cynthia Feland, withheld critical evidence from the defense - evidence that largely clears Blunt in this area.
"Cynthia M. Feland did not disclose to Michael Hoffman, defense attorney for Charles Blunt, the Wahl memo, and other documents which were evidence or information known to the prosecutor that tended to negate the guilt of the accused or mitigate the offense." In recognition of this, the panel recommended Ms Feland's license to practice law be suspended. We urge that you read the entire report of the panel, including the penalties the board recommended be imposed on Ms. Feland. As we indicated, Feland, now a judge in your state, has been recommended for suspension and a fine over these findings.


Similar Profiles

city

Browse ZoomInfo's Business
Contact Directory by City

city

Browse ZoomInfo's
Business People Directory

city

Browse ZoomInfo's
Advanced Company Directory