Legal Opinion

State v. Rose

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided October 13, 1982No. 13628PublishedCited by 54 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

FOSHEIM, Chief Justice.

Appellant was convicted by a jury of sexual contact with a child under fifteen in violation of SDCL 22-22-7. 1 He was sentenced to five years in the South Dakota State Penitentiary and appeals from the judgment. We affirm.

SDCL 22-22-7.1 defines the term sexual contact used in SDCL 22-22-7. It specifies that the requisite intent is arousal or gratification of the sexual desire of either party. Before trial the State sought a ruling from the trial court on the admissibility of other crimes to prove intent, motive, opportunity, preparation, knowledge and plan pursuant to…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. State v. JohnsonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1982
  2. F. M. Slagle & Co. v. BushnellSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1944
  3. State v. HoughtonSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1978
  4. Davis v. KresslySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1961
  5. State v. BrownSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1979

2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by54 opinions

  1. State v. RufenerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1986
  2. State v. MeansSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1985
  3. State v. McCaffertySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
  4. State v. BaskerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1991
  5. State v. HuberSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1984

49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API