Case Title: State v. Van Loh

Citation: 191 N.W.2d 294

Docket Number: 

State: south-dakota

Court: South Dakota Supreme Court

Date: 1971-10-06T00:00:00Z

Document:
191 N.W.2d 294 (1971) STATE of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. Alan VAN LOH, Defendant and Respondent. No. 10853. Supreme Court of South Dakota. October 6, 1971. *295 Gordon Mydland, Atty. Gen., Leonard E. Andera, Asst. Atty. Gen., Pierre, for plaintiff and appellant. Robert C. Heege, Sioux Falls, for defendant and respondent. WINANS, Judge. This case is brought before us on an appeal by the State. It presents but a single question, hereinafter referred to. The trial court held that Senate Bill 192 designated as "An Act establishing the office of the commissioner of drugs and substances control within the office of the attorney general of the state of South Dakota to meet the problem of narcotics, drugs and substances abuse", did not take effect as of and on the date of February 13, 1970. Senate Bill 192 is Chapter 229 of the Session Laws of 1970 and is found in SDCL 39-17, beginning with Section 44 and following sections of the same chapter, under the heading "Drugs and Substances Control". The bill as passed had what is referred to as an emergency clause. Section 18 of the bill is as follows, "Whereas, this Act is necessary for the immediate support of the state government and its existing institutions, an emergency is hereby declared to exist and this Act shall be in full force and effect from and after its passage and approval." The bill passed the legislature by a vote of more than two-thirds of all the members elected of each house. It was approved by the Governor on February 13, 1970. The trial court held that such emergency clause is not valid because Senate Bill 192 "is not necessary for the support of the government and its existing public institutions." The appeal is from that holding and brings the question before us for decision. Article III, § 1 of the South Dakota Constitution provides in pertinent part as follows: It is provided in § 22 of the same Constitutional Article: In the case of State ex rel. Flanagan v. Taylor, 1920, 43 S.D. 264, 178 N.W. 985, we quoted with approval Hodges v. Snyder, 1920, 43 S.D. 166, 178 N.W. 575, as follows: And further in Flanagan we said: Quoting further therein from other authority we stated: And quoting still further in Flanagan from other cited authority: In the case of Engelcke v. Farmers State Bank of Canistota, 1932, 61 S.D. 92, 246 N.W. 288, this court held: We believe these cited South Dakota cases, together with the authority cited in them, completely answers the question before us at this time. We, therefore, hold that Senate Bill 192 is not necessary for the support of the state government and its existing institutions and the emergency clause is invalid. Judgment affirmed. BIEGELMEIER, P. J., and HANSON and WOLLMAN, JJ., concur.