Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

495 N.W.2d 658

State v. McConnell

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided February 10, 1993

South Dakota Supreme Court · decided 1993-02-10

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently November 2015

4 state decisions

Key passage — most relied on by later courts

“McConnell was sentenced to eight years in the state penitentiary. While in the penitentiary he will be under supervision of the Department of Corrections, an agency of the executive branch. State v. Wooley, 461 N.W.2d 117 (S.D.1990). SDCL 24-2-1. The circuit court also placed McConnell on probation for eight years starting from the date of his sentencing. As a probationer, McConnell will be under the supervision of the court service department of the judicial branch. SDCL 23A-27-12.1. This concurrent penitentiary term and probation requirement effectively put McConnell under simultaneous supervision of both the executive and judicial branches of government. In State v. Huftile, 367 N.W.2d 193 (S.D.1985) and Wooley , we held that a defendant convicted of a crime should not be under simultaneous supervision of agencies of two separate branches of government.”

quoted by 1 later decision, including State v. Moon

Applies SD 23A § 23A-27-12.1 · SD 24 § 24-2-1

Relies on State v. Huftile · State v. Wooley

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1993-02-10

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

AMUNDSON, Justice.

¶1William Michael McConnell (hereinafter “McConnell”) appeals his judgment of conviction for aggravated assault. We affirm the conviction, but reverse the sentence and remand for resentencing.

¶2McConnell was sentenced to eight years in the state penitentiary. While in the penitentiary he will be under supervision of the Department of Corrections, an agency of the executive branch. State v. Wooley, 461 N.W.2d 117 (S.D.1990). SDCL 24-2-1. The circuit court also placed McConnell on probation for eight years starting from the date of his sentencing. As a probationer, McConnell will be under the supervision of the court service department of the judicial branch. SDCL 23A-27-12.1.

¶3This concurrent penitentiary term and probation requirement effectively put McConnell under simultaneous supervision of both the executive and judicial branches of government. In State v. Huftile, 367 N.W.2d 193 (S.D.1985) and Wooley, we held that a defendant convicted of a crime should not be under simultaneous supervision of agencies of two separate branches of government. Based on this established precedent, the sentence is reversed and remanded to the circuit court with direction to fashion a sentence consistent with this decision.

¶4McConnell also argued that the trial court erred by refusing to give a requested jury instruction. We have considered McConnell’s arguments and find them to be without merit. We affirm the trial court’s decision.

MILLER, C.J., and HENDERSON and WUEST, JJ., concur.SABERS, J., concurs specially.
/495/nw2d/658 · .json · Public domain