State v. Deal, 866 N.W.2d 141

In August 2013, Deal hosted a hog roast at his Vermillion cabin; L.S.S. attended with her sister L.S., ages seven and younger.
L.S. reported changes in behavior and later disclosed to a caregiver and police that Deal touched her genitals and digitally penetrated her.
Deal was hospitalized after a fall and later located; investigators searched his home and found materials suggesting a suicide attempt.
A patrol-car interview occurred on December 13, 2013, after Deal’s release from hospital; Miranda warnings were read after initial questions.
Deal moved to suppress statements and evidence obtained from the interview, arguing custodial interrogation without valid waiver.
A jury convicted Deal of first-degree rape and sexual contact with a child; the circuit court denied suppression and judgment of acquittal motions.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the Miranda suppression ruling was correct	State argues Deal was not in custody; waiver was voluntary; non-testimonial observations irrelevant.	Deal asserts custody, improper waiver, coercive interrogation; statements should be suppressed.	No reversible error; interrogation not custodial and waiver voluntary.
Whether there was sufficient evidence to sustain the convictions	State contends testimony and corroboration establish guilt beyond reasonable doubt.	Deal challenges inconsistencies in L.S.’s account and lack of corroboration.	Sufficient evidence supports guilt beyond a reasonable doubt; convictions affirmed.

State v. Aesoph, 2002 S.D. 71 (2002) ( Miranda under custody test guidance)
Thompson v. Keohane, 516 U.S. 99 (1995) (two-part custody test for Miranda applicability)
Oregon v. Mathiason, 429 U.S. 492 (1977) (Miranda warnings required when custodial)
State v. Gesinger, 1997 S.D. 6 (1997) (objective standard for custody)
State v. Brammer, 304 N.W.2d 111 (1981) (rape and sexual contact mutually exclusive)
State v. Buchhold, 2007 S.D. 15 (2007) (review of evidence sufficiency and credibility)