Court Opinion

ID: 9738122
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 19:43:13.588708+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:03.853362
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(concurring specially).
I write specially because I cannot concur with the author’s statements on page seven that: “Failure to comply with the statutory provisions of SDCL 23A-7-4 does not amount to a constitutional defect” citing Goodroad, and “(factual basis of a plea is not a constitutional consideration or proper on habeas appeal)” citing King. I think the jury is still out on these matters and the author’s authorities impliedly agree. Goodroad and King are questionable authority for these propositions.
Separately, the State was allowed to put in evidence not only after all parties rested their cases but even after the attorney for the petitioner had argued his case. This procedure gives the State an undue advantage and should not be encouraged.