State v. Hillyer, 23 N.W.3d 782

Richard Hillyer, an inmate at Pennington County Jail, broke a jail-issued razor, kept half the blade (wrapped and hidden in his mouth), and admitted intent was self-harm.
Jail staff became suspicious when Hillyer failed to return the razor; he later handed over the altered blade, admitting both his self-harm motive and a desire to manipulate housing assignment.
Hillyer was charged with felony possession of a weapon by an inmate (SDCL 24-11-47), and the State also charged him as a habitual offender due to prior felonies.
At trial, the blade and related testimony were presented; Hillyer admitted the factual conduct but challenged whether the blade met the legal definition of a "weapon."
The trial court denied Hillyer’s requests for a lesser-included offense instruction (for misdemeanor possession of an unauthorized article), for judgment of acquittal, and for a cautionary instruction about hypothetical uses of the blade.
The jury convicted Hillyer, and he received a 25-year sentence as a habitual offender; he appealed on various instructional and sufficiency grounds.

Issue	Plaintiff (State) Argument	Defendant (Hillyer) Argument	Held
Refusal of lesser-included offense instruction	Altered article offense is not subset of weapon possession; elements differ	Possessing a weapon in jail always includes possessing an altered article; instruction required	Not error; elements of misdemeanor are not subset of felony charge
Denial of motion for judgment of acquittal	Sufficient evidence blade was a "weapon" under statute; intention irrelevant	Blade wasn’t used/designed as a weapon against others; insufficient evidence	Not error; objective design and jury could find blade was a weapon
Failure to instruct against considering hypothetical uses	Jury correctly instructed in law; hypothetical uses fair for jury consideration	Jury risked convicting based on what could be done, not what was done; specific instruction was necessary	No abuse of discretion; referring jury to existing instructions sufficient
Cumulative error/fair trial	No individual errors, thus no cumulative prejudice	Combined effect of alleged errors undermined fairness	No merit; fair trial provided

State v. Williams, 748 N.W.2d 435 (S.D. 2008) (de novo standard for review of lesser-included offense instructions)
State v. Willingham, 933 N.W.2d 619 (S.D. 2019) (elements test for lesser-included offense)
State v. Swan, 925 N.W.2d 476 (S.D. 2019) (right to instruction if evidence supports lesser charge)
State v. Seidel, 953 N.W.2d 301 (S.D. 2020) (sufficiency of evidence standard)
State v. Schrempp, 887 N.W.2d 744 (S.D. 2016) (court discretion in jury instruction inquiries)
State v. White Face, 857 N.W.2d 387 (S.D. 2014) (right to jury unanimity)