reglab/housing_qa huggingface dataset:
SD Codified L § 19-19-302 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-302 - Presumptions in criminal cases.

19-19-302. Presumptions in criminal cases.(a) Scope. Except as otherwise provided by statute, in criminal cases, presumptions against an accused, recognized at common law or created by statute, including statutory provisions that certain facts are prima facie evidence of other facts or of guilt, are governed by this section.(b) Submission to jury. The court is not authorized to direct the jury to find a presumed fact against the accused. If a presumed fact establishes guilt or is an element of the offense or negatives a defense, the court may submit the question of guilt or of the existence of the presumed fact to the jury, but only if a reasonable juror on the evidence as a whole, including the evidence of the basic facts, could find guilt or the presumed fact beyond a reasonable doubt. If the presumed fact has a lesser effect, the question of its existence may be submitted to the jury provided the basic facts are supported by substantial evidence or are otherwise established, unless the court determines that a reasonable juror on the evidence as a whole could not find the existence of the presumed fact.(c) Instructing the jury. Whenever the existence of a presumed fact against the accused is submitted to the jury, the court shall instruct the jury that it may regard the basic facts as sufficient evidence of the presumed fact but is not required to do so. In addition, if the presumed fact establishes guilt or is an element of the offense or negatives a defense, the court shall instruct the jury that its existence, on all the evidence, must be proved beyond a reasonable doubt. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 302); SDCL §§19-11-2 to 19-11-4.
SD Codified L § 19-19-401 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-401 - Test for relevant evidence.

19-19-401. Test for relevant evidence.Evidence is relevant if:(a)It has any tendency to make a fact more or less probable than it would be without the evidence; and(b)The fact is of consequence in determining the action. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 401); SDCL §19-12-1; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-24), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-402 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-402 - Relevant evidence generally admissible--Irrelevant evidence inadmissible.

19-19-402. Relevant evidence generally admissible--Irrelevant evidence inadmissible.All relevant evidence is admissible, except as otherwise provided by constitution or statute or by this chapter or other rules promulgated by the Supreme Court of this state. Evidence which is not relevant is not admissible. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 402); SDCL §19-12-2.
SD Codified L § 19-19-403 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-403 - Excluding relevant evidence for prejudice, confusion, waste of time, or other reasons.

19-19-403. Excluding relevant evidence for prejudice, confusion, waste of time, or other reasons.The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value is substantially outweighed by a danger of one or more of the following: unfair prejudice, confusing the issues, misleading the jury, undue delay, wasting time, or needlessly presenting cumulative evidence. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 403); SDCL §19-12-3; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-25), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-404 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-404 - Character evidence--Crimes or other acts.

19-19-404. Character evidence--Crimes or other acts.(a) Character evidence.(1)Prohibited uses. Evidence of a person's character or character trait is not admissible to prove that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character or trait.(2)Exceptions for a defendant or victim in a criminal case. The following exceptions apply in a criminal case:(A)A defendant may offer evidence of the defendant's pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecutor may offer evidence to rebut it;(B)Subject to the limitations in §19-19-412, a defendant may offer evidence of an alleged victim's pertinent trait, and if the evidence is admitted, the prosecutor may:(i)Offer evidence to rebut it; and(ii)Offer evidence of the defendant's same trait; and(C)In a homicide case, the prosecutor may offer evidence of the alleged victim's trait of peacefulness to rebut evidence that the victim was the first aggressor.(3)Exceptions for a witness. Evidence of a witness's character may be admitted under §§19-19-607 to 19-19-609, inclusive.(b) Crimes, wrongs, or other acts.(1)Prohibited uses. Evidence of a crime, wrong, or other act is not admissible to prove a person's character in order to show that on a particular occasion the person acted in accordance with the character.(2)Permitted uses; notice in a criminal case. This evidence may be admissible for another purpose, such as proving motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, absence of mistake, or lack of accident. On request by a defendant in a criminal case, the prosecutor must:(A)Provide reasonable notice of the general nature of any such evidence that the prosecutor intends to offer at trial; and(B)Do so before trial--or during trial if the court, for good cause, excuses lack of pretrial notice. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 404); SDCL §§19-12-4, 19-12-5; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-26), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-405 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-405 - Methods of proving character.

19-19-405. Methods of proving character.(a) By reputation or opinion. When evidence of a person's character or character trait is admissible, it may be proved by testimony about the person's reputation or by testimony in the form of an opinion. On cross-examination of the character witness, the court may allow an inquiry into relevant specific instances of the person's conduct.(b) By specific instances of conduct. When a person's character or character trait is an essential element of a charge, claim, or defense, the character or trait may also be proved by relevant specific instances of the person's conduct. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 405); SDCL §§19-12-6, 19-12-7; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-27), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-406 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-406 - Habit--Routine practice.

19-19-406. Habit--Routine practice.Evidence of a person's habit or an organization's routine practice may be admitted to prove that on a particular occasion the person or organization acted in accordance with the habit or routine practice. The court may admit this evidence regardless of whether it is corroborated or whether there was an eyewitness. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 406); SDCL §19-12-8; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-28), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-407 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-407 - Subsequent remedial measures.

19-19-407. Subsequent remedial measures.When measures are taken that would have made an earlier injury or harm less likely to occur, evidence of the subsequent measures is not admissible to prove:(1)Negligence;(2)Culpable conduct;(3)A defect in a product or its design; or(4)A need for a warning or instruction.But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as impeachment or--if disputed--proving ownership, control, or the feasibility of precautionary measures. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 407); SDCL §19-12-9; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-29), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-408 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-408 - Compromise offers and negotiations.

19-19-408. Compromise offers and negotiations.(a) Prohibited uses. Evidence of the following is not admissible--on behalf of any party--either to prove or disprove the validity or amount of a disputed claim or to impeach by a prior inconsistent statement or a contradiction:(1)Furnishing, promising, or offering--or accepting, promising to accept, or offering to accept--a valuable consideration in compromising or attempting to compromise the claim; and(2)Conduct or a statement made during compromise negotiations about the claim--except when offered in a criminal case and when the negotiations related to a claim by a public office in the exercise of its regulatory, investigative, or enforcement authority.(b) Exceptions. The court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness's bias or prejudice, negating a contention of undue delay, or proving an effort to obstruct a criminal investigation or prosecution. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 408); SDCL §19-12-10; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-30), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-409 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-409 - Offers to pay medical and similar expenses.

19-19-409. Offers to pay medical and similar expenses.Evidence of furnishing, promising to pay, or offering to pay medical, hospital, or similar expenses resulting from an injury is not admissible to prove liability for the injury. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 409); SDCL §19-12-11; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-31), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-410 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-410 - Pleas, plea discussions, and related statements.

19-19-410. Pleas, plea discussions, and related statements.(a) Prohibited uses. In a civil or criminal case, evidence of the following is not admissible against the defendant who made the plea or participated in the plea discussions:(1)A guilty plea that was later withdrawn;(2)A nolo contendere plea;(3)A statement made during a proceeding on either of those pleas under §§23A-7-2 to 23A-7-15, inclusive; or(4)A statement made during plea discussions with an attorney for the prosecuting authority if the discussions did not result in a guilty plea or they resulted in a later-withdrawn guilty plea.(b) Exceptions. The court may admit a statement described in this section in a criminal proceeding for perjury or false statement, if the defendant made the statement under oath, on the record, and with counsel present. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 410); SDCL §19-12-12; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-32), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-411 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-411 - Liability insurance.

19-19-411. Liability insurance.Evidence that a person was or was not insured against liability is not admissible to prove whether the person acted negligently or otherwise wrongfully. But the court may admit this evidence for another purpose, such as proving a witness's bias or prejudice or proving agency, ownership, or control. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 411); SDCL §19-12-13; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-33), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-411.1 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-411.1 - Statements and actions by health care providers not admissible to prove negligence in medical malpractice actions.

19-19-411.1. Statements and actions by health care providers not admissible to prove negligence in medical malpractice actions.No statement made by a health care provider apologizing for an adverse outcome in medical treatment, no offer to undertake corrective or remedial treatment or action, and no gratuitous act to assist affected persons is admissible to prove negligence by the health care provider in any action for damages for personal injury or death alleging malpractice against any health care provider. Nothing in this section prevents the admission, for the purpose of impeachment, of any statement constituting an admission against interest by the health care provider making such statement. Source: SL 2005, ch 117, §1; SDCL §19-12-14.
SD Codified L § 19-19-412 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-412 - Sex-offense cases--Victim's sexual behavior or predisposition.

19-19-412. Sex-offense cases--Victim's sexual behavior or predisposition.(a) Prohibited uses. The following evidence is not admissible in a civil or criminal proceeding involving alleged sexual misconduct:(1)Evidence offered to prove that a victim engaged in other sexual behavior; or(2)Evidence offered to prove a victim's sexual predisposition.(b) Exceptions.(1)Criminal cases. The court may admit the following evidence in a criminal case:(A)Evidence of specific instances of a victim's sexual behavior, if offered to prove that someone other than the defendant was the source of semen, injury, or other physical evidence;(B)Evidence of specific instances of a victim's sexual behavior with respect to the person accused of the sexual misconduct, if offered by the defendant to prove consent or if offered by the prosecutor; and(C)Evidence whose exclusion would violate the defendant's constitutional rights.(2)Civil cases. In a civil case, the court may admit evidence offered to prove a victim's sexual behavior or sexual predisposition if its probative value substantially outweighs the danger of harm to any victim and of unfair prejudice to any party. The court may admit evidence of a victim's reputation only if the victim has placed it in controversy.(c) Procedure to determine admissibility.(1)Motion. If a party intends to offer evidence under this section, the party must:(A)File a motion that specifically describes the evidence and states the purpose for which it is to be offered;(B)Do so at least 14 days before trial unless the court, for good cause, sets a different time;(C)Serve the motion on all parties; and(D)Notify the victim or, when appropriate, the victim's guardian or representative.(2)Hearing. Before admitting evidence under this rule, the court must conduct an in camera hearing and give the victim and parties a right to attend and be heard. Unless the court orders otherwise, the motion, related materials, and the record of the hearing must be and remain sealed.(d) Definition of "victim." In this section, "victim" includes an alleged victim. Source: SL 2011, ch 237 (Supreme Court Rule 10-13), eff. July 1, 2012; SDCL §19-12-15; SL 2016, ch 239 (Supreme Court Rule 15-34), eff. Jan. 1, 2016.
SD Codified L § 19-19-501 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-501 - Privileges recognized only as provided.

19-19-501. Privileges recognized only as provided.Except as otherwise provided by constitution or statute or by this chapter or other rules promulgated by the Supreme Court of this state, no person has a privilege to:(1)Refuse to be a witness;(2)Refuse to disclose any matter;(3)Refuse to produce any object or writing; or(4)Prevent another from being a witness or disclosing any matter or producing any object or writing. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 501); SDCL §19-13-1.
SD Codified L § 19-19-504 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-504 - Spousal privilege.

19-19-504. Spousal privilege.(a) Definition. A communication is confidential if it is made privately by any person to his or her spouse during their marriage and is not intended for disclosure to any other person.(b) General rule of privilege. An accused in a criminal proceeding has a privilege to prevent his spouse from testifying as to any confidential communication between the accused and the spouse.(c) Who may claim the privilege. The privilege may be claimed by the accused or by the spouse on behalf of the accused. The authority of the spouse to do so is presumed.(d) Exceptions. There is no privilege under this section in a proceeding in which one spouse is charged with a crime against the person or property of:(1)The other; (2)A child of either; (3)A person residing in the household of either; or (4)A third person committed in the course of committing a crime against any of them.  Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 504); SDCL §§19-13-12 to 19-13-15.
SD Codified L § 19-19-505 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-505 - Religious privilege.

19-19-505. Religious privilege.(a) Definitions. As used in this section:(1)A "clergyman" is a minister, priest, rabbi, accredited Christian Science practitioner, or other similar functionary of a religious organization, or an individual reasonably believed so to be by the person consulting him;(2)A communication is "confidential" if made privately and not intended for further disclosure except to other persons present in furtherance of the purpose of the communication.(b) General rule of privilege. A person has a privilege to refuse to disclose and to prevent another from disclosing a confidential communication by the person to a clergyman in his professional character as spiritual adviser.(c) Who may claim privilege. The privilege may be claimed by the person, by his guardian or conservator, or by his personal representative if he is deceased. The person who was the clergyman at the time of the communication is presumed to have authority to claim the privilege but only on behalf of the communicant. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 505); SDCL §§19-13-16 to 19-13-18.
SD Codified L § 19-19-506 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-506 - Vote at public election.

19-19-506. Vote at public election.Every person has a privilege to refuse to disclose the tenor of his vote at a public election conducted by secret ballot. This privilege does not apply if the court finds that the vote was cast illegally or determines that the disclosure should be compelled pursuant to the election laws of the state. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 506); SDCL §19-13-19.
SD Codified L § 19-19-507 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-507 - Trade secrets.

19-19-507. Trade secrets.A person has a privilege, which may be claimed by him or his agent or employee, to refuse to disclose and to prevent other persons from disclosing a trade secret owned by him, if the allowance of the privilege will not tend to conceal fraud or otherwise work injustice. If disclosure is directed, the court shall take such protective measures as the interest of the holder of the privilege and of the parties and the interest of justice require. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 507); SDCL §19-13-20.
SD Codified L § 19-19-508 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-508 - Confidential communications to public officer.

19-19-508. Confidential communications to public officer.A public officer cannot be examined as to communications made to him in an official confidence, when the public interests would suffer by the disclosure. Source: SL 1979, ch 358 (Supreme Court Rule 78-2, Rule 508); SDCL §19-13-21.
SD Codified L § 19-19-508.1 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-508.1 - Student and counselor, psychologist, or social worker--Exceptions.

19-19-508.1. Student and counselor, psychologist, or social worker--Exceptions.No counselor or school psychologist, certificated in accordance with the certification regulations of the South Dakota Board of Education Standards, or social worker licensed under chapter 36-26 and regularly employed as a counselor, school psychologist, or social worker for a private or public elementary or secondary school or school system in the State of South Dakota, may divulge to any other person, or be examined concerning any information or communication given to the counselor, school psychologist, or social worker in the counselor's, school psychologist's, or social worker's official capacity by a student unless:(1)This privilege is waived in writing by the student; or(2)The information or communication was made to the counselor, school psychologist, or social worker for the express purpose of being communicated or of being made public; or(3)The counselor, school psychologist, or social worker has reason to suspect, as a result of that information or communication, that the student or some other persons have been subjected to child abuse or that the student's physical or mental health or the physical or mental health of other persons may be in jeopardy. Source: SL 1972, ch 131; SL 1974, ch 161; SDCL Supp, §19-2-5.1; SL 1998, ch 122, §1; SDCL §19-13-21.1; SL 2017, ch 81, §57; SL 2019, ch 103, §1.
SD Codified L § 19-19-508.2 (2021)
2021 South Dakota Codified Laws|Title 19 - Evidence|Chapter 19 - South Dakota Rules of Evidence|Section 19-19-508.2 - College or university counselor and student--Exceptions--Qualifications of counselor.

19-19-508.2. College or university counselor and student--Exceptions--Qualifications of counselor.No counselor, regularly employed on a full-time basis as a counselor for a private or public college or university in the State of South Dakota, may divulge to any other person, or be examined concerning any information or communication given to the counselor in his official capacity by a client unless:(1)This privilege is waived in writing by the student; or(2)The information or communication was made to the counselor for the express purpose of being communicated or of being made public.For the purposes of this section "counselor" and "counseling" mean service performed by persons trained in clinical counseling employed by public and private colleges and universities to provide psychological counseling services to enrolled students under stated policy guidelines of the institution. Source: SL 1974, ch 163, §§1, 2; SDCL Supp, §19-2-5.2; SDCL §19-13-21.2.