State v. Beck
This text of 239 N.W. 185 (State v. Beck) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering South Dakota Supreme Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
[1, 2] This is an appeal from a judgment pursuant to a verdict of guilty in a criminal case. A majority of the judges think that the appellant did not receive the fair and impartial trial intended to be guaranteed to him by the Constitution *Page 208 of this state. The judges are not in agreement, however, as to their reasons for so thinking. An expression of precise reasons not concurred in by a majority of the judges would constitute no binding precedent of this court and would not be helpful to either the trial court or the bar. It seems pointless, therefore, for the several judges to set forth the reasons that influence them individually to concur in the ultimate conclusion which the majority have arrived at.
The judgment and order appealed from are therefore reversed without further opinion, and the cause remanded for new trial.
POLLEY, P.J., and CAMPBELL and WARREN, JJ., concur.
ROBERTS, J., disqualified and not sitting.
RUDOLPH, J., dissents.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
239 N.W. 185, 59 S.D. 207, 1931 S.D. LEXIS 185, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-beck-sd-1931.