Court Opinion

ID: 9712718
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 04:58:44.395413+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:23:13.879352
License: Public Domain

BIEGELMEIER, J.
(concurring). That this conviction must be reversed for error in admitting the testimony given by defendant at the coroner’s inquest follows from the holding in State v. Hoffman, 53 S.D. 182, 220 N.W. 615 and approved in State v. Smith, 56 S.D. 238, 228 N.W. 240. See also State v. Allison, 116 Mont. 352, 153 P.2d 141; 5 A.L.R.2d 1446, 1453. Whether the court should further direct the information be quashed seems of such moment as to require this expression of concurrence. This legal principle was announced by dictum in the Smith opinion, accepted, distinguished or not applied in State ex rel. Poach v. Sly, 63 S.D. 162, 257 N.W. 113 and State v. Sinnott, 72 S.D. 100, 30 N.W.2d 455, because of ithe unusual facts or reasons stated in those opinions. Other courts have not gone so far. United States v. Scully, 2 Cir., 225 F.2d 113.
The statutory and constitutional history of the problem in New York is told in part in People v. Molineux, 168 N.Y. 264, 61 N.E. 286, 308, 62 L.R.A. 193, 291; People v. Ferola, 215 N.Y. 285, 109 N.E. 500; People v. De Feo, 308 N.Y. 595, 127 N.E.2d 592, and People v. Steuding, 6 N.Y.2d 214, 189 N.Y.S.2d 166, 160 N.E.2d 468. Requiring a de*219fendant to testify at a coroner’s inquest under subpo'éííá was held no defense to a later prosecution as This1'would permit a coroner to grant immunity to a defendant and dismiss a criminal action, which only a trial court may do on application of the prosecuting attorney under statutes similar to our ’ SDC 1960 Supp. 34.2204, 34.2205. Faucett v. State, 10 Okl.Cr. 111, 134 P. 839, L.R.A.1918A, 372. The constitutional right must prevail over the statute.: Mindful of the Consequences of the unconstitutional interrogation, the state may not thereafter successfully prosecute. It has made its choice. Here it did so in the face of the several opinions of this court noted above. They persuade me to concur in the court’s opinion.