The SD Supreme Court handed down two decisions this morning,
holding inter alia:
1) Attorney suspended from practice of law for 1 year;
2) Felony of hit and run involving injury does not require
proof of knowledge of injury.
Summaries follow:
DISCIPLINE OF SWIER, 2020 S.D. 7: Attorney is suspended from practice of law
for 1 year. This decision is unanimous (5-0)
with opinion authored by Chief Justice Gilbertson. Circuit Judges Means and Sabers sat on this
case, in lieu of Justices Kern and DeVaney.
STATE v. NEKOLITE, 2020 S.D. 8: Defendant was convicted of DUI
2nd offense and felony hit and run involving injury. Defendant appeals only the hit and run involving
injury, arguing that the State must prove he had knowledge of an
injury. The drivers engaged in a conversation
after the accident, after whichDefendant drove away from the scene. That conversation is described in ¶ 2 as
follows:
[Other
driver] asked Nekolite if he was hurt, but she could not understand his
response and thought he was impaired. [Other driver] told the dispatcher that
she had hurt her left thumb, but she did not tell Nekolite that she was
injured.
The SD Supreme Court affirmed.
The Court recognized that there is a split of authority among
jurisdictions which have enacted similar statutes but ultimately holds in¶ 21:
We believe
the better view is to hold that our statutes do not require knowledge of the
injury as an essential element of an offense under SDCL 32-34-5.
This decision is unanimous (5-0) with opinion authored by
Justice Salter. Retired Justice Meierhenry sat on this case which was submitted
on the briefs May 28, 2019.
These decisions may be accessed at
