State v. Iwan

2010 S.D. 92 (2010) · Supreme Court of South Dakota · December 8, 2010 · No. #25196

Summary

The South Dakota Supreme Court held that venue for a prosecution based on passing an insufficient-funds check was proper in Jackson County, where the defendant handed the check to the recipient's agent in exchange for fuel. The court concluded that neither South Dakota's multi-county venue statute nor its mail-related venue statute established venue in Hutchinson County, and it reversed and remanded for dismissal.

Holdings

  1. The proper burden of proof for venue is not proof beyond a reasonable doubt; venue is not an integral part of the offense and therefore may be established under the applicable lower burden used by the circuit court.
  2. Venue was improper in Hutchinson County because the charged offense was completed in Jackson County when Iwan passed the check to Stern Oil's agent for present consideration while knowing that his account lacked sufficient funds. The employee's later mailing and Stern Oil's receipt and deposit of the check did not establish venue in Hutchinson County.

Questions Presented

  1. What burden of proof applies to venue in a criminal prosecution under South Dakota law?
  2. Whether Hutchinson County was a proper venue for prosecution of grand theft by passing an insufficient-funds check when Iwan handed the check to Stern Oil's employee in Jackson County and the employee later mailed it to Stern Oil in Hutchinson County.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded

Cases Cited (6)

  • State v. Greene, 86 S.D. 177, 192 N.W.2d 712 (1971)(followed)
  • State v. Sullivan, 2002 S.D. 125, 652 N.W.2d 786(followed)
  • State v. Haase, 446 N.W.2d 62 (S.D. 1989)(followed)
  • State v. Graycek, 335 N.W.2d 572 (S.D. 1983)(followed)
  • Tines v. State, 553 S.W.2d 913 (Tenn. Crim. App. 1977)(distinguished)
  • State v. McMillian, 111 P.3d 1154 (Or. Ct. App. 2005)(distinguished)

Cited In (0)

No citing cases on record yet.

Court Document

Open PDF
Loading document…