Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Black

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided September 22, 1993No. 17551Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partAmundson, Justice

I concur with everything in the majority writing as it relates to legal test analysis. I further agree wholeheartedly that “there is evidence to support Black’s requested lesser offense instruction.” I part company with the majority, however, when it jumps into the jury box to hold that the jury would have convicted Black only as to the offense charged. I base this dissent on my previous dissent in Black I. Therein, I relied on People v. Shaw, 646 P.2d 375 (Colo.1982), which stated:

“We do not say that [manslaughter] should have been the verdict, or that the jury would have found differently…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. United States v. Jerome White Horse, Sr. Carl Makes Him First and Eagle Hunter, A/K/A Vetal Chasing HawkCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1986
  2. People v. ShawSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
  3. State v. GallipoSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
  4. State v. WooleySouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990
  5. State v. PeckSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1990

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

Powered by the Exa API