Legal Opinion
State v. Bracht
South Dakota Supreme Court
Decided December 17, 1997No. NonePublishedCited by 17 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
KONENKAMP, Justice.
[¶ 1.] Jaison E. Bracht appeals his sentence for third offense driving while under the influence of alcohol (DUI). Because the prosecutor breached the plea agreement, we vacate the sentence contained in the judgment and remand for resentencing before a different judge as required by the United States Supreme Court.
FACTS
[If 2.] Bracht was charged with third offense DUI. During arraignment, his defense counsel outlined the following plea bargain:
May it please the Court, Paul Riley appearing with and on behalf of Jaison Bracht. Your Honor, this is the initial appearance on…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Santobello v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Mabry v. JohnsonSupreme Court of the United States · 1984
- United States v. Raymond RobinCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Steven W. ArnettCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1979
- United States v. Peter A. Crusco and Phillip A. Cimmino. Appeal of Phillip CimminoCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1976
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State v. MyersWest Virginia Supreme Court · 1998
- Vanden Hoek v. WeberSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2006
- State v. WaldnerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2005
- Baldridge v. WeberSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2008
- State v. JonesSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 2012
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.