13 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1977–2022 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by South Dakota courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Remaclegreen2 sentences1990Reference is also made to my special concurrence in State v. Remacle, 386 N.W.2d 38, 40 (S.D.1986), reflecting that the scope of review cannot go back to State v. Reddington, 80 S.D. 390 , 125 N.W.2d 58 (1963), as well as its progeny, if a federal constitutional error arises. 1990Reference is also made to my special concurrence in State v. Remacle, 386 N.W.2d 38, 40 (S.D.1986), reflecting that the scope of review cannot go back to State v. Reddington, 80 S.D. 390 , 125 N.W.2d 58 (1963), as well as its progeny, if a federal constitutional error arises. | 2 | 2 |
Chapman v. Californiared2 sentences2016Thus, “before a federal constitutional error can be held harmless, the court must be able to declare a belief that it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. at 24, 87 S.Ct. at 828 . [¶ 11.] Pursley asserts that “the effect of impugning [his] affirmative defense was particularly harmful due to the nature .of a self-defense theory. [He] admitted as part of the self-defense that he did harm the alleged victims.” However, it is not reasonably possible that the prosecutor’s objected to comments influenced the jury. 1993In Chapman , the United States Supreme Court held that “before a federal constitutional error can be held harmless, the court must be able to declare a belief that it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.” 386 U.S. at 24 , 87 S.Ct. at 828 . | 1 | 6 |
Rick Dwayne Nebinger, Sr. v. John Ault, Warden, and Thomas Miller, Attorney General for the State of Iowagreen2 sentences2009Moeller v. Weber, 2004 SD 110 , ¶ 42 n. 3, 689 N.W.2d 1 , 15 n. 3 (citing State v. Dillon, 2001 SD 97, ¶ 12 , 632 N.W.2d 37, 43 ). [¶ 8.] As the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in Nebinger v. Ault, "[r]ulings on the admission or exclusion of evidence in state trials rarely rise to the level of a federal constitutional violation." 208 F.3d 695, 697 (8th Cir.2000). 2009Moeller v. Weber, 2004 SD 110 , ¶ 42 n. 3, 689 N.W.2d 1 , 15 n. 3 (citing State v. Dillon, 2001 SD 97, ¶ 12 , 632 N.W.2d 37, 43 ). [¶ 8.] As the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in Nebinger v. Ault, “[r]ulings on the admission or exclusion of evidence in state trials rarely rise to the level of a federal constitutional violation.” 208 F.3d 695, 697 (8th Cir.2000). | 1 | 1 |
Richard Bugh v. Betty Mitchell, Wardengreen2 sentences2009"Only `when an evidentiary ruling is so egregious that it results in a denial of fundamental fairness,' may it violate due process and warrant habeas relief." Harris v. Wolfenbarger, 2007 WL 2421545 , * 12 (E.D.Mich.) (quoting Bugh v. Mitchell, 329 F.3d 496, 512 (6th Cir.2003)). 2009“Only ‘when an evidentiary ruling is so egregious that it results in a denial of fundamental fairness,’ may it violate due process and warrant habeas relief.” Harris v. Wolfenbarger, 2007 WL 2421545 , * 12 (E.D.Mich.) (quoting Bugh v. Mitchell, 329 F.3d 496, 512 (6th Cir.2003)). | 1 | 1 |
Dickerson v. United Statesred2 sentences2002It is resolved now, under the recent decision in Dickerson v. United States, that Miranda is a federal constitutional requirement, reviewable under federal standards. 530 U.S. 428, 432 , 120 S.Ct. 2326, 2329 , 147 L.Ed.2d 405, 411 (2000). 2002It is resolved now, under the recent decision in Dickerson v. United States, that Miranda is a federal constitutional requirement, reviewable under federal standards. 530 U.S. 428, 432 , 120 S.Ct. 2326, 2329 , 147 L.Ed.2d 405, 411 (2000). | 1 | 1 |
Harrington v. Californiared2 sentences1986Given a federal constitutional error, and given overwhelming evidence of guilt in the record, consider, however, the holdings in Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223, 231-32 , 93 S.Ct. 1565, 1570-71 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208, 215 (1973), and Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250, 254 , 89 S.Ct. 1726, 1728 , 23 L.Ed.2d 284, 288 (1969). 1986Given a federal constitutional error, and given overwhelming evidence of guilt in the record, consider, however, the holdings in Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223, 231-32 , 93 S.Ct. 1565, 1570-71 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208, 215 (1973), and Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250, 254 , 89 S.Ct. 1726, 1728 , 23 L.Ed.2d 284, 288 (1969). | 1 | 1 |
Brown v. United Statesgreen2 sentences1986Given a federal constitutional error, and given overwhelming evidence of guilt in the record, consider, however, the holdings in Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223, 231-32 , 93 S.Ct. 1565, 1570-71 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208, 215 (1973), and Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250, 254 , 89 S.Ct. 1726, 1728 , 23 L.Ed.2d 284, 288 (1969). 1986Given a federal constitutional error, and given overwhelming evidence of guilt in the record, consider, however, the holdings in Brown v. United States, 411 U.S. 223, 231-32 , 93 S.Ct. 1565, 1570-71 , 36 L.Ed.2d 208, 215 (1973), and Harrington v. California, 395 U.S. 250, 254 , 89 S.Ct. 1726, 1728 , 23 L.Ed.2d 284, 288 (1969). | 1 | 1 |
United States v. John Rispo, in No. 71-1413 Appeal of Robert Rispo, in No. 71-1414green1 sentence1977See also United States v. Rosner, 2 Cir., 485 F.2d 1213 , and United States v. Rispo, 1972, 3 Cir., 460 F.2d 965 . | 1 | 1 |
United States v. Edmund Rosnergreen1 sentence1977See also United States v. Rosner, 2 Cir., 485 F.2d 1213 , and United States v. Rispo, 1972, 3 Cir., 460 F.2d 965 . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in South Dakota. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Donnelly v. DeChristoforo
green
2 sentences2022Prosecutorial misconduct reaches the level of a federal constitutional violation only if the argument ‘so infect[s] the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting convictions a denial of due process.’” Smith, 1999 S.D. 83 , ¶ 52, 599 N.W.2d at 355 (quoting Donnelly, 416 U.S. at 643 , 94 S. Ct. at 1871 ). 2022Prosecutorial misconduct reaches the level of a federal constitutional violation only if the argument ‘so infect[s] the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting convictions a denial of due process.’” Smith, 1999 S.D. 83 , ¶ 52, 599 N.W.2d at 355 (quoting Donnelly, 416 U.S. at 643 , 94 S. Ct. at 1871 ). | 3 | 1999–2022 |
State v. Reddington
green
2 sentences1990Reference is also made to my special concurrence in State v. Remacle, 386 N.W.2d 38, 40 (S.D.1986), reflecting that the scope of review cannot go back to State v. Reddington, 80 S.D. 390 , 125 N.W.2d 58 (1963), as well as its progeny, if a federal constitutional error arises. 1990Reference is also made to my special concurrence in State v. Remacle, 386 N.W.2d 38, 40 (S.D.1986), reflecting that the scope of review cannot go back to State v. Reddington, 80 S.D. 390 , 125 N.W.2d 58 (1963), as well as its progeny, if a federal constitutional error arises. | 2 | 1987–1990 |
State v. Hofman
green
2 sentences2022“Prejudicial error is error which in all probability produced some effect upon the jury’s verdict and is harmful to the substantial rights of the party assigning it.” Lee, 1999 S.D. 81 , ¶ 21, 599 N.W.2d at 634 (quoting State v. Hofman, 1997 S.D. 51 , ¶ 13, 562 N.W.2d 898, 902 ). “[N]o hard and fast rules exist which state with certainty when prosecutorial misconduct reaches a level of prejudicial error which demands reversal of the conviction and a new trial; each case must be decided on its own facts.” Id. (quoting Stetter, 513 N.W.2d at 590 ). -18- #29801 [¶39.] Hankins immediately objected 2022“Prejudicial error is error which in all probability produced some effect upon the jury’s verdict and is harmful to the substantial rights of the party assigning it.” Lee, 1999 S.D. 81 , ¶ 21, 599 N.W.2d at 634 (quoting State v. Hofman, 1997 S.D. 51 , ¶ 13, 562 N.W.2d 898, 902 ). “[N]o hard and fast rules exist which state with certainty when prosecutorial misconduct reaches a level of prejudicial error which demands reversal of the conviction and a new trial; each case must be decided on its own facts.” Id. (quoting Stetter, 513 N.W.2d at 590 ). -18- #29801 [¶39.] Hankins immediately objected | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Smith
green
1 sentence2022Prosecutorial misconduct reaches the level of a federal constitutional violation only if the argument ‘so infect[s] the trial with unfairness as to make the resulting convictions a denial of due process.’” Smith, 1999 S.D. 83 , ¶ 52, 599 N.W.2d at 355 (quoting Donnelly, 416 U.S. at 643 , 94 S. Ct. at 1871 ). | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Lee
green
1 sentence2022“Prejudicial error is error which in all probability produced some effect upon the jury’s verdict and is harmful to the substantial rights of the party assigning it.” Lee, 1999 S.D. 81 , ¶ 21, 599 N.W.2d at 634 (quoting State v. Hofman, 1997 S.D. 51 , ¶ 13, 562 N.W.2d 898, 902 ). “[N]o hard and fast rules exist which state with certainty when prosecutorial misconduct reaches a level of prejudicial error which demands reversal of the conviction and a new trial; each case must be decided on its own facts.” Id. (quoting Stetter, 513 N.W.2d at 590 ). -18- #29801 [¶39.] Hankins immediately objected | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Stetter
green
1 sentence2022“Prejudicial error is error which in all probability produced some effect upon the jury’s verdict and is harmful to the substantial rights of the party assigning it.” Lee, 1999 S.D. 81 , ¶ 21, 599 N.W.2d at 634 (quoting State v. Hofman, 1997 S.D. 51 , ¶ 13, 562 N.W.2d 898, 902 ). “[N]o hard and fast rules exist which state with certainty when prosecutorial misconduct reaches a level of prejudicial error which demands reversal of the conviction and a new trial; each case must be decided on its own facts.” Id. (quoting Stetter, 513 N.W.2d at 590 ). -18- #29801 [¶39.] Hankins immediately objected | 1 | 2022–2022 |
State v. Dillon
green
2 sentences2009Moeller v. Weber, 2004 SD 110 , ¶ 42 n. 3, 689 N.W.2d 1 , 15 n. 3 (citing State v. Dillon, 2001 SD 97, ¶ 12 , 632 N.W.2d 37, 43 ). [¶ 8.] As the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in Nebinger v. Ault, “[r]ulings on the admission or exclusion of evidence in state trials rarely rise to the level of a federal constitutional violation.” 208 F.3d 695, 697 (8th Cir.2000). 2009Moeller v. Weber, 2004 SD 110 , ¶ 42 n. 3, 689 N.W.2d 1 , 15 n. 3 (citing State v. Dillon, 2001 SD 97, ¶ 12 , 632 N.W.2d 37, 43 ). [¶ 8.] As the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in Nebinger v. Ault, “[r]ulings on the admission or exclusion of evidence in state trials rarely rise to the level of a federal constitutional violation.” 208 F.3d 695, 697 (8th Cir.2000). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
Moeller v. Weber
green
2 sentences2009Moeller v. Weber, 2004 SD 110 , ¶ 42 n. 3, 689 N.W.2d 1 , 15 n. 3 (citing State v. Dillon, 2001 SD 97, ¶ 12 , 632 N.W.2d 37, 43 ). [¶ 8.] As the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in Nebinger v. Ault, “[r]ulings on the admission or exclusion of evidence in state trials rarely rise to the level of a federal constitutional violation.” 208 F.3d 695, 697 (8th Cir.2000). 2009Moeller v. Weber, 2004 SD 110 , ¶ 42 n. 3, 689 N.W.2d 1 , 15 n. 3 (citing State v. Dillon, 2001 SD 97, ¶ 12 , 632 N.W.2d 37, 43 ). [¶ 8.] As the Eighth Circuit Court of Appeals noted in Nebinger v. Ault, “[r]ulings on the admission or exclusion of evidence in state trials rarely rise to the level of a federal constitutional violation.” 208 F.3d 695, 697 (8th Cir.2000). | 1 | 2009–2009 |
State Ex Rel. Department of Transportation v. Spiry
green
2 sentences1999Spiry, 1996 SD 14, ¶ 11 , 543 N.W.2d at 263 . 1999Spiry, 1996 SD 14, ¶ 11 , 543 N.W.2d at 263 . | 1 | 1999–1999 |
State v. Rosales
green
2 sentences1984In State v. Rosales, 302 N.W.2d 804 (S.D.1981), this court described prejudicial error as “that which in all probability must have produced some effect on the final *86 result.” Id. at 807 . 1984In State v. Rosales, 302 N.W.2d 804 (S.D.1981), this court described prejudicial error as “that which in all probability must have produced some effect on the final *86 result.” Id. at 807 . | 1 | 1984–1984 |
Fahy v. Connecticut
green
2 sentences1982We, therefore, do no more than adhere to the meaning of our Fahy [v. State of Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 , 84 S.Ct. 229 , 11 L.Ed.2d 171 ] case when we hold, as we now do, that before a federal constitutional error can be held harmless, the court must be able to declare a belief that it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. 386 U.S. at 21-22, 24 , 87 S.Ct. at 827, 828 (emphasis added). 1 In Harrington, supra, the United States Supreme Court stated: The question whether the alleged error in the present case was “harmless” under the rule of Chapman arose in a state trial for attempted robbery an 1982We, therefore, do no more than adhere to the meaning of our Fahy [v. State of Connecticut, 375 U.S. 85 , 84 S.Ct. 229 , 11 L.Ed.2d 171 ] case when we hold, as we now do, that before a federal constitutional error can be held harmless, the court must be able to declare a belief that it was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. 386 U.S. at 21-22, 24 , 87 S.Ct. at 827, 828 (emphasis added). 1 In Harrington, supra, the United States Supreme Court stated: The question whether the alleged error in the present case was “harmless” under the rule of Chapman arose in a state trial for attempted robbery an | 1 | 1982–1982 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.