Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 1973–2014 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. Effie Sylvia Little Beargreen2 sentences1994In State v. Caffrey , this court joined the following language from United States v. Little Bear, 583 F.2d 411, 414 (8th Cir.1978): *606 Owing to the often coercive impact of a lie detector test, full instructions of the suspect's rights should be furnished whenever such examinations are administered to persons under criminal investigation.... 1994In State v. Caffrey, this court joined the following language from United States v. Little Bear, 583 F.2d 411, 414 (8th Cir.1978): Owing to the often coercive impact of a lie detector test, full instructions of the suspect’s rights should be furnished whenever such examinations are administered to persons under criminal investigation.... | 2 | 2 |
State v. Caffreygreen2 sentences2014In State v. Caffrey, the officers, without notifying any family member or adult, continually pressured the juvenile and repeatedly lied to the juvenile that he would be forced to take a lie detector test. 332 N.W.2d 269, 271-72 (S.D.1983). [¶ 40.] None of the actions taken by the officers with Diaz rise to the level of impropriety found in these other cases. 2014In State v. Caffrey, the officers, without notifying any family member or adult, continually pressured the juvenile and repeatedly lied to the juvenile that he would be forced to take a lie detector test. 332 N.W.2d 269, 271-72 (S.D. 1983). [¶40.] None of the actions taken by the officers with Diaz rise to the level of impropriety found in these other cases. | 1 | 4 |
State v. Fallergreen2 sentences1983In State v. Faller, 88 S.D. 685, 688 , 227 N.W.2d 433, 435 (1975), we stated: The situation a lie detector presents can best be described as a psychological rubber hose. 1983In State v. Faller, 88 S.D. 685, 688 , 227 N.W.2d 433, 435 (1975), we stated: The situation a lie detector presents can best be described as a psychological rubber hose. | 1 | 1 |
People v. Andrewsgreen2 sentences1973See also, People v. Andrews, 14 Cal.App.3d 40 , 92 Cal.Rptr. 49 , where it was held to be reversible error (when considered in conjunction with the prosecutor’s misconduct on an unrelated matter) for the trial court to have asked a key prosecution witness whether he had taken a lie detector test and whether the charges against him had been dismissed after such test, to which the witness replied in the affirmative. 5 . 1973See also, People v. Andrews, 14 Cal.App.3d 40 , 92 Cal.Rptr. 49 , where it was held to be reversible error (when considered in conjunction with the prosecutor’s misconduct on an unrelated matter) for the trial court to have asked a key prosecution witness whether he had taken a lie detector test and whether the charges against him had been dismissed after such test, to which the witness replied in the affirmative. 5 . | 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lohnes
green
2 sentences1984This is not a ease where the juvenile was interrogated for several hours late at night, see State v. Lohnes, 1 324 N.W.2d 409 (S.D.1982), or where the police intentionally delayed contacting the juvenile’s parent or guardian, Id., or where, in addition to these factors, the police misled the juvenile and employed the threat of a lie detector test, see State v. Caffrey, supra. Here, Sheriff Brandis sought the presence of the defendant’s mother before the confession used in evidence was written and signed. 1984This is not a ease where the juvenile was interrogated for several hours late at night, see State v. Lohnes, 1 324 N.W.2d 409 (S.D.1982), or where the police intentionally delayed contacting the juvenile’s parent or guardian, Id., or where, in addition to these factors, the police misled the juvenile and employed the threat of a lie detector test, see State v. Caffrey, supra. Here, Sheriff Brandis sought the presence of the defendant’s mother before the confession used in evidence was written and signed. | 2 | 1984–1984 |
Oregon v. Elstad
green
2 sentences1990Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298 , 105 S.Ct. 1285 , 84 L.Ed.2d 222 (1985); Satter, supra. The statements made by Jenner following the lie detector test should *732 have been suppressed, as they are in violation of Miranda . 1990Oregon v. Elstad, 470 U.S. 298 , 105 S.Ct. 1285 , 84 L.Ed.2d 222 (1985); Satter, supra. The statements made by Jenner following the lie detector test should *732 have been suppressed, as they are in violation of Miranda . | 1 | 1990–1990 |
State v. Adkins
green
2 sentences1983Likewise, in State v. Adkins, 88 S.D. 571 , 225 N.W.2d 598 (1975), we held to be voluntary certain inculpatory statements made during and subsequent to a lie detector test, after noting that the defendant had signed a consent form prior to taking the test and that his counsel had previously approved the suggestion that the defendant take the test. 1983Likewise, in State v. Adkins, 88 S.D. 571 , 225 N.W.2d 598 (1975), we held to be voluntary certain inculpatory statements made during and subsequent to a lie detector test, after noting that the defendant had signed a consent form prior to taking the test and that his counsel had previously approved the suggestion that the defendant take the test. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Sparks v. State
green
2 sentences1983In Sparks v. State, 248 Ind. 429 , 229 N.E.2d 642 (Ind.1967), the Supreme Court of Indiana held involuntary a confession that was obtained from an inexperienced 17-year old boy on the basis of the result of a lie detector test that the youth did not know he could not be required to take: Appellant testified that he did not know that he could not be required to take the lie detector test, and not having been so informed, reference to the purported results of that test in inducing appellant to make the third confession, constituted an undue exercise of influence, as well as a denial of his const 1983In Sparks v. State, 248 Ind. 429 , 229 N.E.2d 642 (Ind.1967), the Supreme Court of Indiana held involuntary a confession that was obtained from an inexperienced 17-year old boy on the basis of the result of a lie detector test that the youth did not know he could not be required to take: Appellant testified that he did not know that he could not be required to take the lie detector test, and not having been so informed, reference to the purported results of that test in inducing appellant to make the third confession, constituted an undue exercise of influence, as well as a denial of his const | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Mattox v. State
green
2 sentences1973Such explicit reference to a polygraph test was held to be reversible error in Mattox v. State, 240 Miss. 544 , 128 So. 2d 368 , where several direct references were made to the fact that the state’s key witness had taken a lie detector test. 1973Such explicit reference to a polygraph test was held to be reversible error in Mattox v. State, 240 Miss. 544 , 128 So. 2d 368 , where several direct references were made to the fact that the state’s key witness had taken a lie detector test. | 1 | 1973–1973 |
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.