State v. Boston

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Dakota affirmed Samuel Wayne Boston's conviction for second-degree felony murder and life sentence without parole arising from the death of Richard Gitter. The court held that sufficient circumstantial evidence supported the conviction and rejected challenges involving evidence of Boston's sexual orientation, alleged nondisclosure of exculpatory evidence, exclusion of psychiatric history, prosecutorial misconduct, and an alleged compromise verdict.

Holdings

1. The evidence was sufficient to sustain Boston's conviction for second-degree felony murder because the jury could reasonably find that Gitter died from manual strangulation and that Boston engaged in or attempted sexual contact with him while he was incapable of consenting.
2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by admitting testimony that Boston had previously described himself as bisexual and later described himself as heterosexual, where the evidence was used to impeach his statement to the investigating officer.
3. The trial court properly denied a new trial based on the alleged nondisclosure of photographs and an Army officer's interview because Boston failed to establish that the evidence would probably produce an acquittal and, as to the photographs, failed to show that he could not have discovered them through due diligence.
4. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by excluding Boston's psychiatric and psychological history because Boston made no adequate offer of proof and failed to show that the evidence was relevant, particularly after withdrawing his insanity plea and not claiming that mental illness prevented him from forming the required intent.
5. The trial court properly denied a new trial based on the prosecutor's closing argument, display of photographs of the victim's family, and the jury's note criticizing the State's evidence because Boston failed to preserve the misconduct claims and the note did not establish a compromise verdict.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the evidence was sufficient to support Boston's conviction for second-degree felony murder.
2. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by admitting evidence concerning Boston's sexual orientation and prior statements about it.
3. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a new trial based on alleged nondisclosure of photographs and an Army officer's interview.
4. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by excluding Boston's psychiatric and psychological history.
5. Whether the trial court abused its discretion by denying a new trial based on alleged prosecutorial misconduct and an alleged compromise verdict.

Disposition

affirmed