State v. Flying Horse, 16709
| Decision Date | 16 May 1990 |
| Docket Number | No. 16709,16709 |
| Citation | 455 N.W.2d 605 |
| Parties | STATE of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Herbert FLYING HORSE, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
John R. Steele, Aurora County State's Atty., Plankinton, for plaintiff and appellee; Roger A. Tellinghuisen, Atty. Gen., Pierre, on the brief.
Robert W. Swank, Stiles, Anderson & Swank, Mitchell, for defendant and appellant.
This appeal is taken from a Final Judgment of Conviction and Sentence dated May 5, 1989, wherein Appellant Herbert Flying Horse (Flying Horse) was sentenced to imprisonment in the South Dakota State Penitentiary for five (5) years. Also appealed are the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law and Order Waiving Juvenile Jurisdiction and Transferring to Adult Court dated May 7, 1987. On appeal, Flying Horse argues that:
(1) The trial court erred in ordering a suspended imposition of sentence and thereafter retaining jurisdiction via recommitment to the State Training School after a transfer to adult court;
(2) The trial court did not have sufficient evidence to warrant a waiver of juvenile jurisdiction and transfer to adult court; and
(3) The trial court committed reversible error by admitting the voluntary statement of the co-defendant (Walth) at the transfer hearing.
--Holding--
We affirm the trial court.
A transfer hearing from juvenile to adult court was held on May 7, 1987 for Flying Horse and Walth. At the time of the hearing, Flying Horse was fifteen (15). Walth was seventeen (17). The transfer hearing was bottomed upon these juveniles escaping from the State Training School in Plankinton, Aurora County, South Dakota, on March 17, 1987, and immediately committing crimes in the Plankinton community. They were charged with First Degree Burglary of a residence in Plankinton, Third Degree Burglary of a garage containing an automobile in Plankinton, and Grand Theft of that automobile. A statement taken by Deputy Dwight DeBoer, Aurora County Sheriff's Department, from Walth linked the juveniles to the burglaries and the grand theft.
At the conclusion of the transfer hearing, the court found the crimes committed by Flying Horse to be serious, violent and willful acts. The court found that Flying Horse had a propensity to leave the State Training School. (This was his third escape). Finally, the court found that "there is no rehabilitative aspect left in the program for these two young men." The court found beyond a reasonable doubt that it would be in the best interest of Flying Horse and the public to be treated as an adult. At the conclusion of this hearing, the court transferred both juveniles to adult court.
Preliminary hearings were scheduled for both juveniles on June 3, 1987, but both juveniles, under the advice of counsel, waived preliminary hearing. Separate counsel for both juveniles had negotiated a plea bargain agreement. The agreement pertaining to Flying Horse provided that he plead to one count, that being escape, and that the State would then dismiss all remaining charges; the State and Flying Horse would recommend a suspended imposition of sentence specifically conditioned upon Flying Horse being returned to the State Training School and that Flying Horse successfully complete the School's program. On March 14, 1987, Flying Horse entered into this agreement, with the court stressing that he would be returned to court for sentencing if he were a problem for the Training School or society.
On April 7, 1989, Flying Horse appeared in court again on a Petition for Revocation of an Order Suspending Imposition of Sentence. Flying Horse had been returned to the State Training School under the conditions of the suspended imposition of sentence and had been discharged on parole from the School after he had completed its program. Thereafter, Flying Horse was returned to the School as a "parole violator." At the April hearing, Flying Horse was charged with Escape and two counts of Grand Theft alleged to have occurred on March 13, 1989. Prior to this court appearance the State's Attorney and counsel for Flying Horse worked out an agreement whereby Flying Horse would admit to the Petition for Revocation and all new charges pending against him would be dropped, then the court would be free to sentence Flying Horse on the 1987 Escape conviction. Under the advice of counsel, Flying Horse did admit the petition and was sentenced to five (5) years in the South Dakota State Penitentiary. *
In this case, we hold a trial judge is empowered, under SDCL 26-11-5, to transfer a repeat child offender to adult (circuit) court, impose a suspended imposition of sentence and thereafter transfer the juvenile to the State Training School.
Flying Horse, then a 15 year old boy, was transferred to adult court on four counts: Escape from the State Training School, First Degree Burglary of a residence, Third Degree Burglary of a garage containing an automobile, and Grand Theft of an automobile. Flying Horse has a long history of violence, crime and rebellion. Consequently, the State's effort to rehabilitate him over a long period of time has been to insignificant avail. We base our decision upon SDCL 26-11-5 which provides:
When a boy or girl under the age of eighteen years shall in any circuit court be found guilty of any crime excepting murder, the court may, if in its opinion the accused is a proper subject therefor, instead of entering judgment cause an order to be entered that such boy or girl be sent to the state training school. A copy of such order duly certified by the clerk under the seal of the court shall be sufficient warrant for conveying such boy or girl to the school and for his or her commitment to the custody of the superintendent thereof. (emphasis supplied ours)
Clearly this statute authorizes the trial court to do exactly what it did.
Further, we have reviewed the record and hold that the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Walton
...of the juvenile court and not determine what charges the State can file." Randolph, 876 P.2d at 180; see generally State v. Flying Horse, 455 N.W.2d 605, 608 (S.D.1990) (stating a juvenile transfer hearing is not adjudicatory in nature and only resolves which forum is most appropriate to ho......
-
State v. Jones
...'refers to a discretion exercised to an end or purpose not justified by and clearly against, reason and evidence.' " State v. Flying Horse, 455 N.W.2d 605, 607-08 (S.D.1990) (citation Jones claims the trial court erred because State did not show probable cause. This argument totally lacks m......
-
People in Interest of S.A.H.
...to a discretion exercised to an end or purpose not justified by, and clearly against, reason and evidence.' " State v. Flying Horse, 455 N.W.2d 605, 607-08 (S.D.1990). The trial court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to mandate open adoption in this The best interests of the child i......
-
State v. A.B.
...483 (first degree robbery; commission of felony while armed with firearm). See also Milk, 519 N.W.2d at 313 (assault); State v. Flying Horse, 455 N.W.2d 605 (S.D.1990) (first degree burglary, third degree burglary, grand theft of an automobile). Lastly, regarding the need for long-term reha......
-
Kids can change: reforming South Dakota's juvenile transfer law to rehabilitate children and protect public safety.
...318 (S.D. 1994); State v. Rios, 499 N.W.2d 906, 910 (S.D. 1993); State v. Harris, 494 N.W.2d 619, 627 (S.D. 1993); State v. Flying Horse, 455 N.W.2d 605, 608 (S.D. 1990); State v. Rump, 272 N.W.2d 821, 823 (S.D. 1978); In re Interest of D.M.L., 254 N.W.2d 457,459 (S.D. 1977). (74.) In re In......