City of Sioux Falls v. Johnson
Citation | 78 S.D. 272,100 N.W.2d 750 |
Decision Date | 01 February 1960 |
Docket Number | No. 9748,9748 |
Parties | CITY OF SIOUX FALLS, Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Arnold C. JOHNSON, Defendant and Appellant. |
Court | Supreme Court of South Dakota |
Anderson & Weisensee, Sioux Falls, for defendant and appellant.
John E. Burke, Asst. City Atty., Sioux Falls, for plaintiff and respondent.
The defendant stands convicted of driving while intoxicated in contravention of an ordinance of the City of Sioux Falls. The sufficiency of the evidence to sustain the verdict of guilty is not questioned. The principal contention is that the prosecuting attorney was guilty of such misconduct in the cross-examination of defendant as to render the trial unfair.
In an effort to account for his actions at the time of his arrest, the 22-year-old defendant had stated on direct examination that the arresting officer was angry and he, the defendant, was awfully scared. We quote from the record of the cross-examination as follows:
'Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial and prejudicial.
'Objected to as incompetent, irrelevant and immaterial and improper cross examination.
'Objected to as immaterial.
'And move to have the question stricken from the record for the reasons stated.
Counsel who represented defendant at the trial verified an application for a new trial which contained a statement as follows:
In the absence of a counter showing this statement of counsel must be accepted as true. State v. Wolfe, 64 S.D. 178, at page 184, 266 N.W. 116, at page 119, 104 A.L.R. 464. This comment during the argument of the prosecutor is without foundation in the evidence other than the cross-examination of defendant quoted supra. The propriety of that cross-examination has been considered in the light of this argument to the jury.
The prosecutor recognizes that other arrests are not admissible either as evidence of guilt of the charge under consideration or to discredit the defendant as a witness. State v. Runyan, 49 S.D. 406, 207 N.W. 482; State v. La Mont, 23 S.D. 174, 120 N.W. 1104, and Flathers v. Wilson & Co., 62 S.D. 548, 255 N.W. 149. However, because the defendant had introduced the subject of his previous arrests by his statement, 'I am always scared when I get some case like that' and sought to create the impression that his actions at the time of his arrest were the result of nervousness rather than intoxication, the city attorney contends the exhibited cross-examination was not unfair. We are unable to agree.
In its discretion, a trial court may allow considerable latitude in the cross-examination of the accused. 98 C.J.S. Witnesses Sec. 401, p. 184, and 3 Wharton's Criminal Evidence, 12th Ed., Sec. 887. Cross-examination may be as broad and as searching as the foundation of direct examination or of voluntary statement upon which it rests. State v. Miller, 43 Or. 325, 74 P. 658. And see State v. Vroman, 45 S.D. 465, 188 N.W. 746 and 3 Wharton's Criminal Evidence, 12th Ed., Sec. 889. These general principles do not justify a needless and intentional injection of prejudice. As pointed out in State v. Thompson, 71 S.D. 319, 24 N.W.2d 10, 19, 'An accused, whether guilty or innocent, is entitled to a fair trial, and it is the duty of the court, and of prosecuting counsel as well, to see that he gets one.'
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
State v. Shepley
...by the state. "In the absence of a counter showing this statement of counsel must be accepted as true." City of Sioux Falls v. Johnson, 78 S.D. 272, 275, 100 N.W.2d 750, 751 (1960) (citing State v. Wolfe, 64 S.D. 178, 184, 266 N.W. 116, 119 (1936)). We accept as true defense counsel's recol......
-
Wood v. City of Crooks
......Decided Feb. 26, 1997. Thomas K. Wilka of Hagen, Wilka & Archer, P.C., Sioux Falls, for plaintiff and appellee. Douglas M. Deibert of Cadwell, Sanford, Deibert ......
-
State v. Johnson, 10153
...petit larceny? A It wasn't for stealing. 'Q Oh. You pled guilty to petit larceny, though; didn't you? A yes.' In City of Sioux Falls v. Johnson, 78 S.D. 272, 100 N.W.2d 750, we said: 'In its discretion, a trial court may allow considerable latitude in the cross-examination of the accused. *......
-
City of Brookings v. Jensen
...and do not reach the constitutional issue. Respondent would ask this court to find the holding of this court in City of Sioux Falls v. Johnson, 1960, 78 S.D. 272, 100 N.W.2d 750, as controlling. While it is true that in both Sioux Falls v. Johnson, supra, and in this case defendant actually......