Legal Opinion

Meinders v. Weber

South Dakota Supreme Court

Decided January 5, 2000No. NonePublishedCited by 57 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKonenkamp, Justice

(on reassignment).

[¶ 1.] James Meinders appeals the denial of habeas corpus relief, asserting that (1) South Dakota’s sex offender registration statutes violate the ex post facto clauses of both our state and federal constitutions and constitute cruel and unusual punishment when retroactively applied to him; (2) the amended good time statutes (SDCL 24-2-12 and 24-2-18) violate the ex post facto clauses of both the state and federal constitutions; (3) his fifth amendment right against self-incrimination was violated by the state penitentiary’s sex offender treatment program requirement that he…

2Cases cited60 opinions

  1. Strickland v. WashingtonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
  2. Weaver v. GrahamSupreme Court of the United States · 1981
  3. Trop v. DullesSupreme Court of the United States · 1958
  4. Kennedy v. Mendoza-MartinezSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
  5. Kansas v. HendricksSupreme Court of the United States · 1997

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

3Cited by57 opinions

  1. People v. MalchowIllinois Supreme Court · 2000
  2. Hyatt v. CommonwealthKentucky Supreme Court · 2002
  3. In Re AlvaCalifornia Supreme Court · 2004
  4. Douglas v. StateIndiana Court of Appeals · 2007
  5. Lewis & Clark Rural Water System, Inc. v. SeebaSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006

52 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