13 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1972–2014 0 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. Van Sicklegreen2 sentences2005ANALYSIS ISSUE [¶ 8.] Whether Patten’s lack of representation by counsel, in the absence of a valid waiver, created reversible error in the proceeding below. [¶ 9.] “The defendant in a criminal action has both a constitutional right to be represented by counsel and a constitutional right to represent [her]self, whichever [s]he chooses.” State v. Van Sickle, 411 N.W.2d 665, 666 (S.D.1987). 2 However, before permitting a defendant to represent herself, trial courts must obtain a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel. 2005Id. | 3 | 4 |
State v. Tuttlegreen2 sentences2003“The State must prove a waiver of Miranda rights only by a preponderance of the evidence.” State v. Tuttle, 2002 SD 94, ¶ 8 , 650 N.W.2d 20, 26 (citing Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 168 , 107 S.Ct. 515, 522 , 93 L.Ed.2d 473, 485 (1986)). 2003“The State must prove a waiver of Miranda rights only by a preponderance of the evidence.” State v. Tuttle, 2002 SD 94, ¶ 8 , 650 N.W.2d 20, 26 (citing Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 168 , 107 S.Ct. 515, 522 , 93 L.Ed.2d 473, 485 (1986)). | 1 | 1 |
Colorado v. Connellygreen2 sentences2003“The State must prove a waiver of Miranda rights only by a preponderance of the evidence.” State v. Tuttle, 2002 SD 94, ¶ 8 , 650 N.W.2d 20, 26 (citing Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 168 , 107 S.Ct. 515, 522 , 93 L.Ed.2d 473, 485 (1986)). 2003“The State must prove a waiver of Miranda rights only by a preponderance of the evidence.” State v. Tuttle, 2002 SD 94, ¶ 8 , 650 N.W.2d 20, 26 (citing Colorado v. Connelly, 479 U.S. 157, 168 , 107 S.Ct. 515, 522 , 93 L.Ed.2d 473, 485 (1986)). | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Zerbstgreen2 sentences1997Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461, 1466 (1938). 1997Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U.S. 458, 464 , 58 S.Ct. 1019, 1023 , 82 L.Ed. 1461, 1466 (1938). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Argersinger v. Hamlin
green
2 sentences1976The right to counsel is a basic right of a criminal defendant. “ * * * absent a knowing and intelligent waiver, no person may be imprisoned for any offense, whether classified as petty, misdemeanor, or felony, unless he was represented by counsel at his trial.” 407 U.S. at 37 , 92 S.Ct. at 2012 , 32 L.Ed.2d at 538 . 1976The right to counsel is a basic right of a criminal defendant. “ * * * absent a knowing and intelligent waiver, no person may be imprisoned for any offense, whether classified as petty, misdemeanor, or felony, unless he was represented by counsel at his trial.” 407 U.S. at 37 , 92 S.Ct. at 2012 , 32 L.Ed.2d at 538 . | 2 | 1972–1976 |
Moran v. Burbine
green
2 sentences2014Application of the Totality of the Circumstances [¶ 59.] The totality of the circumstances standard allows the court to evaluate all the facts without reliance on a mechanical or rigid standard to resolve the question of whether the prosecution has, in a given case, met its burden to establish that a juvenile’s purported consent was “made with a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it.” Moran, 475 U.S. at 421 , 106 S.Ct. at 1141 . [¶ 60.] Considering the totality of the circumstances, we do not ignore that Diaz is a 15-y 2014Application of the Totality of the Circumstances [¶ 59.] The totality of the circumstances standard allows the court to evaluate all the facts without reliance on a mechanical or rigid standard to resolve the question of whether the prosecution has, in a given case, met its burden to establish that a juvenile’s purported consent was “made with a full awareness of both the nature of the right being abandoned and the consequences of the decision to abandon it.” Moran, 475 U.S. at 421 , 106 S.Ct. at 1141 . [¶ 60.] Considering the totality of the circumstances, we do not ignore that Diaz is a 15-y | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Bruch
green
1 sentence2014In the end, “the record indicates circumstances from which this [C]ourt can [determine that Craig] was aware of the danger and made a knowing and intelligent waiver.” Id. ¶ 15 (quoting Bruch, 1997 S.D. 74 , ¶ 15, 565 N.W.2d at 792 ). *837 [¶ 27.] (3) Whether Craig’s sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. [¶ 28.] First, Craig argues that the circuit court erred by sentencing Craig without the necessary information. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People Ex Rel. Jmj
green
2 sentences2014Children Should Not be Treated Like Adults [¶ 83.] We know that juveniles “may lack the sophistication, knowledge, or maturity to understand the ramifications of an admission.” In re J.M.J., 2007 S.D. 1 , ¶ 14, 726 N.W.2d 621, 627-28 . 2014As the trial court correctly found here, in its exhaustive seventy-nine page decision, these factors weighed against finding a knowing and intelligent waiver. -47- #26544 Children Should Not be Treated Like Adults [¶83.] We know that juveniles “may lack the sophistication, knowledge, or maturity to understand the ramifications of an admission.” In re J.M.J., 2007 S.D. 1 , ¶ 14, 726 N.W.2d 621, 627-28 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Asmussen
green
1 sentence2014In the end, “the record indicates circumstances from which this [C]ourt can [determine that Craig] was aware of the danger and made a knowing and intelligent waiver.” Id. ¶ 15 (quoting Bruch, 1997 S.D. 74 , ¶ 15, 565 N.W.2d at 792 ). *837 [¶ 27.] (3) Whether Craig’s sentence constitutes cruel and unusual punishment. [¶ 28.] First, Craig argues that the circuit court erred by sentencing Craig without the necessary information. | 1 | 2014–2014 |
People v. Nicholas
green
2 sentences2000Id. 2000Id. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Fred A. Hamilton v. Michael Groose
green
1 sentence1997Hamilton, 28 F.3d at 861-62 . [¶ 10.] We must examine the particular facts and circumstances of each case in order to determine if there has been a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Miranda v. Arizona
green
2 sentences1982NOTES [1] See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [2] Appellant had retained court-appointed counsel in December of 1980 in connection with a disorderly conduct charge. [3] At this suppression hearing, the trial court received testimony from Officer Boschee, Officer Smith, Detective McKelvey, appellant, Strother and several others. [4] The authority for appellant's instruction is found in SDCL 22-5-1, which states: A person may not be convicted of a crime based upon conduct in which he engaged because of the use or threatened use of unlawful force upon him 1982NOTES [1] See Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct. 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). [2] Appellant had retained court-appointed counsel in December of 1980 in connection with a disorderly conduct charge. [3] At this suppression hearing, the trial court received testimony from Officer Boschee, Officer Smith, Detective McKelvey, appellant, Strother and several others. [4] The authority for appellant's instruction is found in SDCL 22-5-1, which states: A person may not be convicted of a crime based upon conduct in which he engaged because of the use or threatened use of unlawful force upon him | 1 | 1982–1982 |
State v. Pieschke
green
1 sentence1978State v. Pieschke, 1978, S.D., 262 N.W.2d 40 ; State v. Adkins, 1975, 88 S.D. 571 , 225 N.W.2d 598 . | 1 | 1978–1978 |
State v. Adkins
green
2 sentences1978State v. Pieschke, 1978, S.D., 262 N.W.2d 40 ; State v. Adkins, 1975, 88 S.D. 571 , 225 N.W.2d 598 . 1978State v. Pieschke, 1978, S.D., 262 N.W.2d 40 ; State v. Adkins, 1975, 88 S.D. 571 , 225 N.W.2d 598 . | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.