State v. Verhoef

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed Troy Martin Verhoef’s convictions on five counts of sexual contact with a child under sixteen. The court held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying challenges for cause to two prospective jurors and that Verhoef failed to show prejudice because the seated jurors were impartial. The court also concluded that the evidence was sufficient to support the convictions despite discrepancies in testimony concerning dates and circumstances.

Holdings

1. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by refusing to remove Orton and Muellenberg for cause because both indicated that they could act fairly and impartially, and Verhoef failed to show actual, material prejudice or that any juror who decided the case was impartial.
2. The trial court properly denied judgment of acquittal on the five counts because, viewed in the light most favorable to the verdict, the evidence and reasonable inferences supported a rational theory of guilt.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying Verhoef's challenges for cause to prospective jurors Orton and Muellenberg.
2. Whether the trial court erred by denying Verhoef's motion for judgment of acquittal because the evidence was insufficient to support the five convictions.

Disposition

affirmed