Court Opinion

ID: 9673734
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 04:17:19.43213+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:16:23.806369
License: Public Domain

DUNN, Chief Justice
(concurring specially).
I would concur in affirming the conviction. Instruction 10, which states that knowledge of a controlled substance was not an element of the crime, was error and would be grounds for reversal except for the fact that defendant’s knowledge or lack of knowledge that he was distributing a controlled drug was not an issue or a defense in the case. The only defense submitted to the jury was whether the defendant was entrapped by Naomi Church. The defendant testified on cross-examination as follows:
“Q Did you obtain them (controlled substances) in Rapid City?
“A I did.
*22“Q Were they obtained in your store?
“A They were.
“Q Now, who did you obtain them from?
“A Dave Mathiason.
“Q Is he from Hill City?
“A He’s from anywhere. I don’t know.
“Q How do you happen to know him?
“A An acquaintance.
“Q How did you happen to obtain them from him as differentiated from somebody else?
“A He walked in my store, said, ‘Hi.’ I said, ‘Hi.’ We were busy, and he kind of pulled me off a little bit like a lot of these people do and says, ‘You know anybody that wants to buy some of this chocolate mescaline I have,’ and I said, ‘No, I can’t think of anybody,’ and I went back to my business. Oh, it must not have been more than two minutes and I thought, ‘This is a good way to get rid of this girl.’
“Q Just a moment. At this time was Kathy Clark or Naomi Church, the same person, was she in the store then?
“A No, not at this time. This was early morning.
“Q Of June 28th?
“A Right.
“Q So then what happened?
“A So then I bought them from him.
*23“Q How many did you buy?
“A She’d asked me for ten, so I told him that I wanted ten and he said, T don’t have that many.’ So I bought what he had.
“Q Which was nine?
“A I don’t know. I know it was more than two and more than three and I know it was more than seven, but whether it was nine or ten or eight I don’t know.
“Q Did you sell all that you obtained to Naomi Church?
“A Sure did.”
Thus, defendant’s own testimony reveals that he knew he was buying a controlled substance from Dave Mathiason and that he was selling a controlled substance to Naomi Church. His only error is that he thought the controlled substance was mescaline instead of LSD. Thus instruction 10 could not be prejudicial to his defense.
I am authorized to state that Justice WINANS joins in this special concurrence.