Court Opinion

ID: 9514648
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-06 22:50:54.091798+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:06:19.687710
License: Public Domain

SABERS, Justice
(concurring in result).
[¶ 33.] I concur in result only.
[¶ 34.] The withdrawal of the motion to suppress the videotaped statements was a mistake. “Defendant had nothing to gain and everything to lose by withdrawing the motion.” Luna v. Solem, 411 N.W.2d 656, 662 (S.D.1987) (Sabers, J., concurring in part and concurring in result in part). If Bradley was subjected to custodial interrogation without receiving Miranda warnings, then the statements would be suppressed. Counsel should have pursued the motion to suppress and required the State to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that the incriminating statements were made freely and • voluntarily. Counsel’s withdrawal of the motion to suppress constitutes deficient performance.