![](https://res.cloudinary.com/micronetonline/image/upload/c_crop,h_628,w_1200,x_0,y_0/f_auto/q_auto:best/f_auto/q_auto:best/v1710431885/tenants/c34f5004-60d3-49f3-9490-d24bee2efb6d/f710d138f42344f38535beee0e1e7f17/1-SDSC-Summaries-1.png)
SD Supreme Court Summaries
The SD Supreme Court handed down one decision this morning, holding, inter alia:
- “Show-up identification” by eye-witnesses tolerated;
Summary follows:
STATE v. OSMAN, 2024 S.D. 15: Defendant was convicted of offenses related to a vehicle collision with a parked vehicle where the driver fled the scene on foot. Eye witnesses identified Defendant in a “show-up identification” procedure, 20 minutes after the incident, with respect to a suspect the police had apprehended nearby. The trial court sentenced the Defendant to 5 years in prison. This appeal is primarily focused on the the trial court’s refusal to suppress the “show-up identification” made by the eyewitnesses to the incident. The SD Supreme Court affirmed, while recognizing that, “ ‘[s]how-up identifications are inherently suspect.’” This ruling is a 4-1 decision, with the Court’s opinion authored by Justice Kern. Justice Myren dissented, stating that, “There [had been] a substantial likelihood of misidentification because of an impermissibly suggestive identification procedure.”
This decision may be accessed at