State v. Berget
853 N.W.2d 45
S.D.2014Background
- Berget was sentenced to death for the murder of corrections officer Ronald Johnson at the South Dakota State Penitentiary.
- In Berget I, this Court remanded for resentencing on the existing record and instructed not to consider the Dr. Bean psychiatric report unless Berget chose to call Bean to testify.
- Berget sought a new sentencing hearing and to introduce new mitigation evidence; the circuit court denied a full new hearing and conducted a limited remand re-sentencing on the existing record.
- The circuit court issued amended findings and an amended judgment of conviction and sentence in 2018, and Berget timely appealed.
- This Court upheld the limited remand approach, concluded no constitutional violation occurred, and affirmed the death sentence.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Limited remand and new mitigation evidence | Berget argues new mitigation must be considered on remand. | State contends remand limited to the existing record; new evidence may be excluded. | Limited remand proper; new post-record mitigation not required. |
| Presence and allocution at limited remand | Berget asserts he had rights to be present and allocute on remand. | State argues absence is harmless and allocution not required under limited remand. | Presence and allocution rights not required; any error found was harmless. |
| Recusal on remand | Berget contends the circuit court should have recused for bias. | Recusal not warranted; challenges lacked merit. | |
| Excessive or disproportionate sentence | Berget challenges proportionality after remand. | State asserts proportionality analysis remains valid and supports not disturbing the sentence. | Death sentence not excessive or disproportionate; proportionality affirmed. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586 (1978) (broad consideration of mitigating evidence required)
- Eddings v. Oklahoma, 455 U.S. 104 (1982) (broad mitigating evidence must be considered)
- Skipper v. South Carolina, 476 U.S. 1 (1986) (right to present mitigating evidence in capital sentencing)
- Gregg v. Georgia, 428 U.S. 153 (1976) (reintroduction of capital punishment with guided procedures)
- Davis v. Coyle, 475 F.3d 761 (2007) (post-trial mitigation evidence on remand varies by circuit)
- Roberts, 137 Ohio St.3d 230, 998 N.E.2d 1100 (2013) (remand limits and allocution considerations; not require updating mitigation)
- Guzek, 546 U.S. 517 (2006) (limits on introducing new evidence at sentencing; trial-management concerns)
- Sivak v. State, 731 P.2d 192 (1986) ( Idaho case on post-conviction mitigation evidence timing)
- Creech v. Arave, 947 F.2d 873 (1991) (necessity of considering post-trial mitigation evidence)
- Arrous, 320 F.3d 355 (2003) (allocution and harmless-error considerations)