State v. Jucht, 2012 S.D. 66

Summer Neuman and two daughters lived in a Bridgewater, SD house with additional adult and juvenile visitors.
Robert L. Anderson, a Bridgewater city council member, suspected Neuman’s house residents of thefts and theft-related activity.
Anderson, intoxicated, gave Kevin Jucht a pistol to hold for protection during a nighttime visit to Neuman’s home.
Anderson and Jucht entered Neuman’s house; Anderson confronted residents and made racially charged remarks; door glass was broken during the confrontation.
Jucht fired three shots from the street after Neuman’s brother and friend arrived with a white van; Anderson retrieved the pistol from Jucht.
Jucht was charged with malicious intimidation or harassment, first-degree burglary, intentional damage to property, disorderly conduct, and commission of a felony while armed; trial court limited evidence about tires/thefts; jury convicted on most counts and the court sentenced to prison terms; conviction was appealed.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Sufficiency of evidence for malicious intimidation or harassment	Jucht argues insufficient evidence that he acted with the required specific intent due to lack of proof of race-based motive	State contends aider-and-abettor theory allows conviction based on principal’s intent and Jucht’s knowledge	Affirmed for sufficiency; evidence supports aiding and abetting with requisite intent
Exclusion of evidence about theft rumors to show motive	Jucht contends evidence about Anderson’s suspicions was essential to show lack of specific intent	State argues evidence was improper to attack credibility and is collateral	Abused discretion; evidence should have been admitted; prejudicial error; reversed and remanded for new trial
Sufficiency of evidence for first-degree burglary	Jucht challenges that entry was not with the required specific intent related to underlying offenses	State maintains circumstantial evidence supports intent to commit underlying offenses	Sufficient circumstantial evidence to support burglary conviction (underlying intent proven)
Sufficiency of evidence for commission of a felony while armed with a firearm	Jucht argues the felony convictions do not support the armed-with-a-firearm charge	Sufficient evidence of underlying felonies and firearm involvement established	Sufficient evidence to sustain conviction for commission of a felony while armed; no reversal on this issue

State v. Morse, 2008 S.D. 66, 753 N.W.2d 915 (S.D. 2008) (sufficiency review standard; substantial evidence required)
State v. Tofani, 2006 S.D. 63, 719 N.W.2d 391 (S.D. 2006) (aiding and abetting; mental state requirements)
Woods v. Solem, 405 N.W.2d 59 (S.D. 1987) (accomplice liability requires common intent and mens rea)