Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Letcher

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided July 17, 1996No. NonePublished

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partGilbertson, Justice

[¶ 39] I respectfully dissent on Issue II. To me there must be an evidentiary basis to overturn this conviction on an abuse of discretion standard of review. I would submit that such evidence cannot be found in this record. We have defined an abuse of discretion as:

An abuse of discretion has been defined by this Court as a decision which is not justified by and clearly against reason and evidence. We will not reverse a decision if ‘we believe a judicial mind, in view of the law and the circumstances could reasonably have reached that conclusion.’

Dakota Cheese, Inc. v. Taylor, 525 N.W.2d 713,…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Dakota Cheese, Inc. v. TaylorSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1995
  2. State v. GerdesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
  3. State v. ShapeSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  4. Pickering v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1977
  5. State v. DaviesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1914

2 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