City of Sioux Falls v. Ewoldt
South Dakota Supreme Court
1Concurring in part, dissenting in partSabers, Justice
[¶ 23.] I dissent from that part of the majority opinion which holds that City’s complaint conformed to the requirements of state law.5 SDCL 32-25-21 sets forth the special requirements for a speeding complaint:
*769In every prosecution for violation of any of §§ 32-25-1 to 32-25-17 [i.e., speeding], inclusive, the complaint, and also the summons or notice to appear, shall specify the speed at which the defendant is alleged to have driven, and also the speed which such section declares shall be lawful at the time and place of such alleged violation. (emphasis added).
City’s complaint failed to…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Grafton v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1907
- Petition of Famous Brands, Inc.South Dakota Supreme Court · 1984
- State v. JohnsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1994
- Honomichl v. StateSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1983
- Jones v. Eastern Michigan MotorbusesMichigan Supreme Court · 1939
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.