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.
6 South Dakota opinions name it 1 courts 2006–2014 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. Moellergreen2 sentences2006State v. Moeller, 511 N.W.2d 803, 809 (S.D.1994). 2006State v. Moeller, 511 N.W.2d 803, 809 (S.D.1994). | 2 | 2 |
State v. Andersongreen2 sentences2014Direct appeals from convictions are “afforded greater scrutiny than a collateral challenge by habeas corpus action.” State v. Anderson, 2013 S.D. 36, ¶ 11 , 831 N.W.2d 54, 57 (citation omitted). 2014Direct appeals from convictions are “afforded greater scrutiny than a collateral challenge by habeas corpus action.” State v. Anderson, 2013 S.D. 36, ¶ 11 , 831 N.W.2d 54, 57 (citation omitted). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Custis v. United States
green
2 sentences2014Id. at 496 , 114 S. Ct. 1738 . [¶20.] In reaching its decision, the Supreme Court reasoned: As we have explained, “[i]nroads on the concept of finality tend to undermine confidence in the integrity of our procedures” and inevitably delay and impair the orderly administration of justice. 2014Id. at 496-97 , 114 S. Ct. at 1738-39 . | 2 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Miller
green
2 sentences2013“A direct appeal from a conviction must be afforded greater scrutiny than a collateral challenge by habeas corpus action.” Id. 2013“Thus, on a direct appeal from a conviction the defendant is entitled to all presumptions and protections possible under our constitution.” Id. [¶ 12.] SDCL 23A-7-1 (Rule 10) governs the procedure for arraignments in South Dakota: An arraignment shall be conducted in open court, except that an arraignment for a Class 2 misdemeanor may be conducted in chambers, and shall consist of reading the indictment, information, or complaint, as is applicable, to the defendant or stating to him the substance of the charge and calling on him to plead thereto. | 1 | 2013–2013 |
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.