State v. Hammond
This text of 357 N.W.2d 278 (State v. Hammond) 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.
Opinions
Appellant was convicted of grand theft (SDCL 22-30A-1 and SDCL 22-30A-17) by a Beadle County jury on October 5, 1983. On October 27, 1983, he was sentenced to a term in the South Dakota State Penitentiary. On appeal from the judgment of conviction, appellant alleges two errors by the trial judge and further contends that he was denied the effective assistance of counsel.
The two allegations of trial court error involve the trial judge’s refusal to suppress statements made by appellant both at the scene of his arrest and later during questioning. Generally, issues involving suppression of statements present novel circumstances and provide- a convenient forum for considering constitutional questions. In this case, however, the issues presented by appellant have been previously decided by this and many other appellate courts. Further discussion of these matters would be fruitless. We hold that appellant’s claims of error are without merit.
[279]*279Appellant contends that his conviction should be reversed because he was not afforded effective assistance of counsel at trial. Much has been written by this court on that subject. A rule has evolved to the effect that the allegation of ineffective assistance of counsel will be considered by this court only upon an appeal from habeas corpus (formerly post-conviction) proceedings unless trial counsel’s actions amount to plain error. State v. Tchida, 347 N.W.2d 338 (S.D.1984); State v. Iron Shell, 336 N.W.2d 372 (S.D.1983); State v. Phipps, 318 N.W.2d 128 (S.D.1982); State v. Brammer, 304 N.W.2d 111 (S.D.1981); State v. McBride, 296 N.W.2d 551 (S.D.1980). From the record presented we find insufficient evidence of ineffective assistance of trial counsel to warrant considering the allegation on direct appeal.
The judgment of conviction is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
357 N.W.2d 278, 1984 S.D. LEXIS 398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hammond-sd-1984.