The
SD Supreme Court handed down one decision this morning, holding inter alia:
- “State’s Duty To Preserve Evidence” analyzed;
Summary
follows:
STATE
v. ZEPHIER, 2020 S.D. 54: This case is summarized in ¶ 1 of the opinion as
follows:
Trevor Zephier appeals his
conviction for first-degree burglary and grand theft, arguing the circuit court
erred when it denied his motion to suppress evidence that was returned to the
owner before trial. Zephier also alleges the court abused its discretion when
it denied his motion for expert fingerprint testing. We affirm.
This
opinion contains a lengthy discussion concerning constitutional issues related
to the State’s Duty to Preserve Evidence, in addition to a discussion
the statutory requirement (SDCL 23A-37-15) imposed upon the State that the
Defendant first be given notice of the State’s intention to return property to
the owner. The Court ultimately
concluded, inter alia, that the evidence failed to possess exculpatory
value.
This
ruling is unanimous (5-0), with opinion authored by Justice Salter.
This
decision may be accessed at
