State of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Arley F. Roach, Defendant and Appellant (South Dakota 2012)

Summary

The South Dakota Supreme Court affirmed Roach’s conviction, holding that the trial court correctly denied his proposed jury instruction on consent, properly admitted the victim’s statements to a medical nurse and to an officer under applicable hearsay exceptions, upheld the State’s race‑neutral peremptory strike, and did not abuse its discretion by allowing the use of the word “rape” at trial. The Court found no prejudice from the denied instruction, deemed the evidentiary rulings preserved or waived as appropriate, and applied the appropriate standards of review. Justice Konenkamp filed a special concurrence emphasizing the need for clear definitive rulings under SDCL 19‑9‑3.

Holding

Whether the trial court erred in denying Roach’s proposed jury instruction on consent. The trial court’s denial of the consent instruction was proper and did not prejudice the defendant; the jury instructions as a whole adequately conveyed the law.

Whether H.S.’s statements to sexual assault nurse Amber Mason were admissible under SDCL 19‑16‑8 (Rule 803(4)). The issue was waived because Roach failed to renew his objection to the nurse’s testimony at trial; therefore the appellate court will not review the admissibility.

Whether the trial court erred in denying Roach’s Batson challenge to the State’s peremptory strike of prospective juror C.B.B.. The trial court’s finding of a race‑neutral reason for the peremptory strike was affirmed.

Whether H.S.’s statements to Officer Terviel were admissible under SDCL 19‑16‑6 (Rule 803(2)). The admission of Officer Terviel’s testimony was within the trial court’s discretion and is affirmed.

Whether the trial court abused its discretion in allowing the use of the word “rape” during trial. The trial court did not abuse its discretion; the use of the term was permissible as shorthand and did not prejudice the defendant.

State of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee v. Arley F. Roach, Defendant and Appellant

Summary

Holding

Cited authorities

Cited by