Court Opinion

ID: 9655124
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-23 19:00:44.201968+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:13:16.193925
License: Public Domain

FOSHEIM, Chief Justice
(dissenting).
The majority erroneously applies the third component of the legal test of a necessarily included offense. The opinion holds that the greater offense of grand theft of livestock can be committed without committing the lesser offense of petty theft. I disagree. In State v. Faulk, 22 S.D. 183, 116 N.W. 72, 74 (1908), we said:
But it seems to be generally held under the law applicable to larceny in this class of cases, where the value of the property alleged to have been stolen is not material, proof of its value is not necessary, as courts and jurors will presume from the nature and character of the property proved to have been stolen that it had some value, (citations omitted)
It is obvious from the nature and character of the property that livestock has some value. Otherwise livestock stealing would unlikely be a felony. If the stolen livestock have a value — under two hundred dollars— then under the legal test the greater offense of grand theft cannot be committed without committing the lesser offense of petty theft which covers property of any value up to two hundred dollars. SDCL 22-30A-17.
The majority opinion therefore should reach the factual test. Since the factual test is not discussed, I withhold comment as to that component.