The
SD Supreme Court handed down two decisions this morning:
- Minors are subject to DUI prosecution in criminal
court;
- Denial of CUP for CAFO upheld;
Summaries
follows:
STATE
v. BETTELYOUN, EHRET, OSBORNE, 2022 S.D. 14:
Three minors under the age of 18 were charged with DUI. Each filed a motion to dismiss, “assert[ing]
that under the language of the applicable statutes, they could only be charged
as children in need of supervision (CHINS) placing them under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the circuit court. SDCL 26-8B-2.” The Magistrate Courts, as well as the Circuit
Courts, ruled in favor of the State, rejecting the minors’ argument. The SD Supreme Court Affirmed, holding:
[¶38.] Despite the Appellants’
perceived disharmony among the different avenues that the State may take when
charging underage drivers under the zero tolerance or DUI statutes, these
arguments involve the wisdom of the Legislature’s penal code, which are
“questions of public policy, not appellate error.” Trask v. Meade Cnty.
Comm’n, 2020 S.D. 25, ¶ 34, 943 N.W.2d 493, 501. And contrary to
Appellants’ claim that the overlapping statutes cause disharmony, the more
tenable reading of the statutes is to conclude that the Legislature intended to
provide prosecutors with the option of charging juveniles under either statute.
This
decision is unanimous (5-0), with opinion authored by Justice Kern.
MILES
v. SPINK COUNTY BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, 2022 S.D. 15: County Board of Ajdustment
denied Conditional Use Permit (CUP) for a Concentrated Animal Feeding Operation
(CAFO). In taking an appeal therefrom,
by way of writ of certiorari to Circuit Court, the allegation was “that
the Board’s decision was arbitrary and that several members of the Board were
biased or held an unreasonable risk of bias, which should have disqualified
them from voting on the CUP.” This assertion was pursued
as follows:
Prior to the hearing on the
writ, Miles deposed each Board member. He moved the circuit court to admit
their depositions into evidence, which the court denied. Prior to the hearing
on the writ, Miles sought permission from the court to call the Board members
to testify in person at the hearing. The circuit court also denied this request.
The
Circuit Court upheld the Board’s decision and the SD Supreme Court
Affirmed. The Court’s decision is
unanimous (5-0), with opinion authored by Justice Kern. Retired Chief Justice Gilbertson participated
in this case which was submitted to the Court on October 5, 2020.
These decisions may be accessed at
http://ujs.sd.gov/Supreme_Court/opinions.aspx .
