Court Opinion

ID: 9740428
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:35:23.218689+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:18.259274
License: Public Domain

FOSHEIM, Chief Justice
(concurring specially).
Although circumstances appear to incriminate Ell, the State failed to persevere in his prosecution. He is still presumed innocent. SDCL 23A-22-3. In light of this presumption and absent proof that the money found belonged to the food store, we cannot conclude claimant is the owner. A recent dissent of Justice Henderson expressed the importance of this principle with strong language. See State v. Holmes, 338 N.W.2d 104, 105 (S.D.1983) (Henderson, J., dissenting).
I join the majority to reverse.