Opinion ID: 1827084
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Whether denial of his motion to strike the testimony of Poor Thunder was error.

Text: After Poor Thunder testified, Arguello moved to strike his testimony on the grounds that he admitted giving prior perjurious testimony and his testimony was inherently incredible, untrustworthy, and unreliable. His motion was denied. Generally, every person is competent to be a witness, SDCL 19-14-1, if they have personal knowledge of the matter, SDCL 19-14-2, and they have sufficient understanding to receive, remember, and narrate impressions, and are sensible to the obligation of an oath. The determination of the witness' competency is within the discretionary power of the trial judge and may be reversed only upon a showing of abuse of discretion. State v. Lufkins, 381 N.W.2d 263, 266 (S.D. 1986) (citations omitted). It is the function of the jury, not this court, to resolve conflicts in the evidence, determine witness credibility, and weigh the evidence. [W]e afford the strongest presumption in favor of the jury's determination of credibility. State v. Svihl, 490 N.W.2d 269, 274 (S.D.1992). Poor Thunder's testimony was sufficiently credible for the jury to consider and Arguello has failed to overcome this presumption. See also text of Issue 9 on sufficiency of evidence.