Opinion ID: 3006413
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: conclusion

Text: [¶37.] Our pre-Rosen decisions firmly establish that a Boykin canvassing is not a necessary condition of conducting a totality-of-the-circumstances analysis as the Court maintains. Beckley, 2007 S.D. 122, ¶ 10, 742 N.W.2d at 844 (quoting Moeller, 511 N.W.2d at 810); Quist, 486 N.W.2d at 267. However, I agree that the greater weight of evidence tends to show that Oleson was fully aware of the consequences of pleading guilty and the rights he would waive in doing so, regardless of any asserted deficiency in the circuit court’s script. Consequently, -21- #27037 Oleson has not met his burden as a habeas petitioner of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that he did not knowingly waive his right against self-incrimination. Therefore, I concur in result.