State v. Miller

Summary

The Supreme Court of South Dakota held that a defendant who pleads not guilty and proceeds to trial has no statutory or constitutional right to be advised by the court of applicable mandatory minimum sentences. The court concluded that the circuit court erred in refusing to impose the mandatory minimum sentences, but affirmed because Miller suffered no prejudice. The court did not reach the attorney-client privilege issue.

Holdings

1. A defendant who pleads not guilty and proceeds to trial has no statutory or constitutional due process right to receive an advisement from the circuit court concerning the mandatory minimum sentence.
2. Any error in the circuit court's refusal to impose the mandatory minimum was harmless because Miller received an effective ten-year sentence, the same imprisonment term that would have resulted from two consecutive five-year mandatory minimum sentences.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a defendant who pleads not guilty and proceeds to trial has a statutory or Fifth Amendment due process right to be advised before or during trial of the mandatory minimum sentence applicable to the charged offense.
2. Whether the circuit court's failure to provide such an advisement warranted a new trial or otherwise invalidated the sentence.
3. Whether the attorney-client privilege barred testimony from Miller's counsel concerning whether Miller had received notice of the mandatory minimum penalties.

Disposition

affirmed