State v. Wilson
| Decision Date | 15 July 2020 |
| Docket Number | #28742 |
| Citation | 947 N.W.2d 131 |
| Parties | STATE of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Deondre Davis WILSON, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | South Dakota Supreme Court |
JASON R. RAVNSBORG, Attorney General, CRAIG M. EICHSTADT, Assistant Attorney General, Pierre, South Dakota, Attorneys for plaintiff and appellee.
MARK KADI of Minnehaha County Office of the Public Advocate, Sioux Falls, South Dakota, Attorneys for defendant and appellant.
[¶1.] A jury found Deondre Wilson guilty of aggravated assault (domestic), simple assault (domestic), interference with emergency communications, and disorderly conduct. He appeals, claiming the existence of plain error through the admission of certain evidence and the prosecutor's closing argument. Wilson directs an additional challenge to his assault convictions, arguing that their domestic designation reflects an essential element that was not proven at trial. Finally, Wilson contends the court utilized an improper procedure for a stipulated post-judgment sentence correction. We affirm and remand with instructions to remove the domestic designation from the aggravated and simple assault convictions and the accompanying obligation to pay two $25 statutory domestic violence fees.
[¶2.] In March 2014, Wilson was living with his girlfriend, Shannon Ihnen, at a Sioux Falls apartment she shared with her father, Steve Ihnen. Wilson was 37 years old at the time, and Steve was 58. The two had a tepid relationship. Wilson and Shannon share a young daughter who also lived in the apartment.
[¶3.] On the evening of March 30, Shannon returned from a trip and found Wilson drunk. An argument ensued, and Shannon asked Wilson to move out. She called a cab to pick him up and accompanied him outside to meet the cab, where they encountered Steve sitting in his car.
[¶4.] Wilson and Steve engaged in a verbal confrontation during which Steve called Wilson "boy." Wilson viewed the comment as a racial insult1 and used an open hand to strike Steve, who then dialed 911. While Steve was on the phone with the 911 operator, Wilson knocked the telephone from Steve's hand and ended the call. The altercation escalated quickly and unevenly. Eyewitness neighbors described how the bigger and younger Wilson took Steve to the ground and beat him with closed fists. Steve was unable to resist or defend himself, and witnesses worried he would be seriously injured or killed.
[¶5.] When the first of several police officers arrived, Wilson walked toward him with his hands in the air. As he approached the officer, Wilson turned around with his hands behind his back as if he was about to be arrested and placed in handcuffs. Officers did not initially arrest Wilson, but they did after conducting an on-scene investigation. Police videos from the evening show an agitated Wilson loudly and repeatedly declaring that his actions were in self-defense. He claimed he was going to "take it to trial," and accused Steve of being a racist. His protests continued unsolicited throughout his arrest and during the drive to the police station.
[¶6.] Steve refused an ambulance, but later allowed a family member to take him to a local hospital emergency department. A computerized tomography
(CT) scan2 of Steve's head showed no injuries, and he was released in the early morning hours of March 31. Photos of Steve taken at the scene and three days later during a meeting at the sheriff's office depict facial bleeding and swelling, a slanted tooth, and scratches on his neck. Steve testified that he had injured his neck in an auto accident several years earlier and now experienced trouble moving his neck after the assault. Steve missed three days of work and sought additional medical care to receive an injection for pain relief. He testified that his dental injuries will require future work to remove teeth and fit dentures, which Steve also attributed to his age. Shannon claimed to have sustained scratches to her arm during the altercation with Wilson.
[¶7.] The State initially charged Wilson with several misdemeanor offenses, including four counts of simple assault (domestic) naming Steve as the victim, four counts of simple assault (domestic) that named Shannon as the victim, one count of disorderly conduct, and one count of interference with emergency communications. Over eight months after the initial charges, the State sought and obtained an indictment that included the original charges as well as an additional charge of aggravated assault (domestic) involving Steve, which is a class three felony.3
[¶8.] Wilson's legal representation through the Minnehaha County Public Defender's Office was reassigned three times before trial. The court reset the case with each reassignment. The first reassignment occurred due to disagreements between Wilson and his counsel. The second reassignment occurred when his attorney left the office for another job. Wilson's third lawyer from the Public Defender's Office was assigned approximately one month before trial. None of Wilson's attorneys filed any substantive pretrial motions or motions in limine.
[¶9.] During the trial, the jury heard testimony from Steve, Shannon, the cab driver, three neighbor witnesses, and three law enforcement officers who responded to the incident. The evidence also included three video and audio recordings from the officers’ in-car video cameras and body microphones in addition to three audio-taped recordings of 911 calls relating to the incident.4 The recorded evidence from the scene included several of Wilson's statements claiming self-defense, as well as the statements of several witnesses who briefly described how Wilson had beaten Steve. The same witnesses later testified at trial. Wilson did not object to the admission of any of this evidence.
[¶10.] Despite his emphatic statements during his arrest, Wilson did not pursue a justification defense at trial and did not testify. Instead, in closing arguments, his attorney conceded that Wilson had assaulted Steve and focused on limiting criminal liability to the simple assault theory and avoiding a conviction for aggravated assault.
[¶11.] During the State's rebuttal closing argument, the prosecutor discussed the extent of Steve's injuries and commented on his need for additional dental work by stating, "I don't know about you, but having a piece of my body taken out and having a fake part put back, is kind of a big deal to me." The prosecutor also explained the "lingering additional charge" of aggravated assault by contrasting law enforcement's "real-time" charging decisions with what was described as the more deliberative process used by the State's Attorney's Office to "look[ ] at all of the reports, review[ ] all the videos, [and] look[ ] at all of the photographs [to determine] what the defendant should be charged with." Wilson did not object to any of these statements.
[¶12.] The circuit court instructed the jury that an assault between members of the same household would support a domestic designation, but the instruction was based upon a previous version of SDCL 25-10-1. The statute was amended during the pendency of this case to eliminate the domestic designation for members of the same household.
[¶13.] The jury found Wilson guilty of aggravated assault (domestic), four counts of simple assault (domestic) involving Steve,5 interference with emergency communications, and disorderly conduct. On July 20, 2015, the circuit court sentenced Wilson to 15 years in the penitentiary with 10 years suspended on the aggravated assault conviction. The court also sentenced Wilson to a total of 200 days in county jail for his misdemeanor convictions.
[¶14.] The circuit court initially ordered Wilson's penitentiary and jail sentences to run concurrently, but after sentencing, the parties and the court agreed the confinement sentences should not run concurrently.6 To address this issue, the judge met with counsel on August 25, 2015, and issued an order modifying Wilson's sentence by suspending all his jail time for the misdemeanor charges. Wilson was not present at the August 25 meeting, and it was not recorded electronically or stenographically by a court reporter.
[¶15.] Wilson did not appeal within 30 days of the court's judgment and sentence, and his convictions became final. See SDCL 23A-32-15. On September 8, 2017—roughly two years later—Wilson filed a habeas corpus petition alleging ineffective assistance of counsel, which included the claims that his trial counsel failed to perfect his direct appeal and that his attorney should have sought to suppress the statements he made during his arrest. After a hearing that included testimony from Wilson's trial counsel, the habeas court7 granted relief by reentering the judgment and sentence on September 11, 2018, allowing Wilson to file a timely direct appeal.8 The habeas court denied relief on other issues presented in the habeas petition, purportedly without prejudice.
[¶16.] Wilson raises several issues on appeal, which we restate as follows:
[¶17.] "Where an issue has not been preserved by objection at trial, our review is limited to whether the trial court committed plain error." State v. Thomas , 2011 S.D. 15, ¶ 20, 796 N.W.2d 706, 713 (quoting State v. Bowker , 2008 S.D. 61, ¶ 45, 754 N.W.2d 56, 69 ). Under SDCL...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Stevens
... ... By ... comparison, the ineffective assistance inquiry ... does not ... involve the correction of an error by the district court, but ... focuses more broadly on the duty of counsel to raise critical ... issues for that court's consideration ... State v. Wilson, 2020 S.D. 41, ¶ 28, 947 N.W.2d 131, 139 ... (citation omitted) (internal quotation marks omitted); ... Neels v. Dooley, 2022 S.D. 4, ¶ 14, 969 N.W.2d ... 729, 734 ... [¶39.] ... The Court's opinion notes this distinction between ... judicial error and ineffective ... ...
-
Piper v. The Attorney Gen.
... BRILEY PIPER, Plaintiff, v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF SOUTH DAKOTA, DAN SULLIVAN, WARDEN, SOUTH DAKOTA STATE PENITENTIARY; Defendants. No. 5:20-CV-05074-RAL United States District Court, D. South ... that the trial record evidences a manifest usurpation of the ... defendant's constitutional rights," State v ... Wilson ... 947 N.W.2d 131,139 n.14 (S.D. 2020) (cleaned up ... and citation omitted). This Court has previously found that ... the Martinez ... ...
-
State v. Townsend
... ... Janklow , 2005 S.D. 25, 46, 693 N.W.2d 685, 700. They "ask the jury to place themselves in the shoes of the victim or make an appeal to the jury to protect the community." State v. Wilson , 2020 S.D. 41, 22, 947 N.W.2d 131, 137. "[I]nappropriate remarks must be examined within the context of the trial to determine whether the prosecutor's behavior amounted to prejudicial error." Id. "A criminal conviction is not to be lightly overturned on the [959 N.W.2d 614 basis of a ... ...
-
State v. Babcock
... ... [51.] GILBERTSON, Chief Justice, and JENSEN, SALTER, and DEVANEY, Justices, concur. -------- Notes: 1 SDCL 25-10-34 requires prosecutors to place a domestic violence notation on charging documents when the "charge involves domestic abuse." As we reiterated in State v. Wilson , "the domestic notation does not signal an essential element of the underlying offense." 2020 S.D. 41, 35, 947 N.W.2d 131, 140. 2 According to Sosa's testimony before the grand jury, Babcock had used methamphetamine the night before the fight. 3 A CAT scan or computerized axial tomography, ... ...