Opinion ID: 1879528
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: sufficiency of evidence as habitual offender

Text: Titus claims that testimony by State's expert was insufficient to conclude that his fingerprints were the same as those on the cards associated with other prior felonies. He also takes exception to the admissibility and sufficiency of the evidence offered by other State's witnesses. State points out that the fingerprint expert easily found numerous points of comparison between the sets of fingerprints and concluded that it was Titus' fingerprints on all three cards. State also argues that SDCL 22-7-11 allows habitual offender to be proven by fingerprint certification and certified records of conviction. State introduced certified records of Titus' prior felony convictions. This evidence was sufficient to support the determination that Titus was the same person convicted of the prior felonies. We affirm. WUEST, C.J., and MORGAN and MILLER, JJ., concur. HENDERSON, J., specially concurs.