Opinion ID: 1865143
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Third Document

Text: And the taxpayers of South Dakota, what have they contributed to the CJIS system in recent years and what is the projection in dollars for 1994 and 1995? Actual Expense FY 90 $100,217 Actual Expense FY 91 $152,185 Actual Expense FY 92 $176,277 Actual Expense FY 93 $175,130 Projected Expense FY 94 $215,000 Projected Expense FY 95 $183,000 This amounts to over 1 million dollars funded or to be funded into this system by the taxpayers of South Dakota in a period of six years! There was no room, financially, for this defense lawyer to obtain records to defend his client. UJS wanted $448.00 from Pack. It is inherently unfair to appoint defense counsel to represent a defendant in a criminal case, deny him sentencing data, and then expect counsel to accomplish his awesome responsibility of protecting his client in the sentencing phase. Counsel was absolutely stripped of defense tools, timely requested, regarding CJIS statistics which were available. I heartily disagree with the interpretation and emphasis in footnote 5 of the majority opinion regarding the holding in Harmelin v. Michigan, 501 U.S. 957, 111 S.Ct. 2680, 115 L.Ed.2d 836 (1991). Justice Scalia, writing for the Court, was joined by Chief Justice Rehnquist. Their exact viewpoint was not shared by seven other Justices. See my special concurrence, Bult v. Leapley, 507 N.W.2d 325, 333 (S.D.1993). I do not, for one moment, approve of Pack's conduct. But the day of approving a sentencesimply because it is within statutory limitsis gonelike sod huts on the prairie. Helm said so, and so does Harmelin. Therefore, I dissent.