South Dakota Supreme Court

State of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. James Albert Cottier, Defendant and Appellant

August 6, 20082008 S.D. LEXIS 122

Summary

The court affirmed Cottier’s conviction for first-degree manslaughter with a dangerous weapon. It held that the self-defense instructions, considered as a whole, were not prejudicially erroneous; that Cottier knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights and gave voluntary statements; and that the trial court properly excluded or limited the proposed hearsay and character evidence. No separate opinions were filed.

Holding

  • Self-defense jury instructions. The trial court did not commit prejudicial error by giving the challenged self-defense instructions. Although some instructions concerning non-felony assault were unnecessary, the defense showed no prejudice, and the instructions concerning pursuit, retreat, and cessation of force accurately stated the law when read with the justifiable-homicide instructions.
  • Miranda waiver and voluntariness of statements. Cottier knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily waived his Miranda rights, and his statements were voluntary. The totality of the circumstances did not show that police coercion overbore his will.
  • Exclusion of Running’s interrogation video and Red Star’s prison record. The trial court did not abuse its discretion in excluding the portions of Running’s interrogation offered as residual hearsay or in excluding Red Star’s prison record. The video lacked sufficient circumstantial guarantees of trustworthiness, and the prison record consisted of specific acts offered impermissibly to prove conformity with a violent character; in any event, exclusion of the video was not prejudicial.

Docket 24411

Cited authorities

  • Rule 404(a)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(a)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)
  • Rule 404(b)

Cited by

Read full opinionPDF