The SD Supreme Court handed down two decisions this morning,
holding inter alia:
Appeal denied to inmate, with 2 justices dissenting on
computation of time;
Life sentences to father & son affirmed.
Summaries follow:
ABDULRAZZAK v. S.D. BD. OF PARDONS AND PAROLES, 2020 S.D.
10:
Appellant’s parole was revoked and he sought appeal to the
Circuit Court. The Circuit Court
dismissed his appeal as untimely. He
presents this appeal to the SD Supreme Court pro se. This decisions presents an analysis of the
“prison mailbox rule” relating to compliance with time limits, as well as the
Civil Procedure Rules regarding compliance and the 3 day extension for filing
for mailing. Additionally, this appeal
addresses the assertion that Appellant was denied effective assistance of
counsel regarding, inter alia, the denial his request for “stand by”
counsel.
The SD Supreme Court denied relief to Appellant on all issues,
but the resolution of the appeal generates a 2 justice dissenting view on one
issue.
As to the purported
application of the “prison mailbox rule” in this state court litigation, the
ruling of the Court is unanimous, 5-0.
This portion of the Court’s ruling is presented by opinion authored by
Justice Salter.
As to the favorable application of the state rules of civil
procedure regarding compliance with time limits, the ruling of the Court is
3-2. This portion of the Court’s ruling
is presented by opinion authored by Retired Justice Severson.
Retired Justice Severson also authors the unanimous (5-0)
ruling of the Court in regard to the ineffective assistance of counsel issue.
Justice Salter authors a dissenting opinion (in which Justice
Jensen joined) regarding the state rules of civil procedure. The resolution of this issue, as per this
dissenting view is set forth in ¶ 43 as follows:
[T]he
Board’s revocation order was served by mail on April 21, 2017. Excluding the
day of service, [inmate’s] thirty-day period for filing an appeal ran on May
21, 2017. However, May 21 was a Sunday, and the operation of SDCL 15-6-6(a)
would move the deadline to Monday, May 22. The three-day mailing period of SDCL
15-6-6(e) should then be added to make [inmate’s] notice of appeal due on
Thursday, May 25, which was, in fact, the date on which it was filed with the
clerk.
STATE v. CEPLECHA, 2020 S.D. 11: Father & son pled guilty
to 1st degree manslaughter.
Prior to sentencing both sought to withdraw their pleas, with the
intention of asserting self-defense. The trial court denied the motions to
withdraw guilty pleas and sentenced both father & son to life in
prison. Separate appeals were filed by
father & son. The appeals were
consolidated by the Court. This decision
affirms both life sentences. The Court’s ruling is unanimous (5-0) with opinion
authored by Justice Kern. Circuit Judge
Hendrickson sat on this case, in lieu of Justice DeVaney.
These decisions may be accessed at
