State v. Washington, 13 N.W.3d 492

Danny Washington was convicted by a jury on eight counts including first-degree kidnapping, aggravated and simple assault, and other related crimes involving his former romantic partner, J.B., in October 2021.
The incident included allegations of physical violence, threats with a firearm, property damage, and intimidation, both in person and through communications.
Washington challenged his convictions and sentencing, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel, improper convictions on multiple aggravated assault counts, insufficient evidence for kidnapping, unconstitutional cumulative errors, and discrepancies between oral and written sentences.
The circuit court sentenced Washington to a total of 100 years (with 60 suspended) for kidnapping, among other concurrent and consecutive sentences, some to run consecutive to prior convictions; a sentence modification order followed the original hearing.
The appeal reviews direct challenges, but also notes that some issues (like ineffective assistance) are more appropriate for habeas corpus review due to insufficient record on direct appeal.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Ineffective assistance of counsel	Defense failed in various duties, warranting reversal	Counsel's actions prejudiced Washington	Not reviewed on direct appeal; no exceptional circumstances shown
Sufficiency of evidence for kidnapping	Jury properly found all elements met	J.B. entered car willingly; no sufficient evidence	Evidence supported conviction; denial of acquittal affirmed
Cumulative errors deprived right to fair trial	Multiple procedural errors prejudiced defendant	Violation of orders, prejudicial statements	No cumulative or plain error shown; fair trial not denied
Written sentence vs. oral sentence inconsistency	Written order should match oral pronouncement	Oral pronouncement suspended more time	Written order clarified ambiguous oral pronouncement; affirmed
Multiple convictions for aggravated assault (double jeopardy)	Convictions/sentencing violated double jeopardy	Multiple convictions for same act improper	Only one sentence imposed; ambiguous case law, but no plain error

State v. St. Cloud, 465 N.W.2d 177 (S.D. 1991) (kidnapping not incidental to another crime if it involves prolonged confinement or increased risk)
State v. Baker, 440 N.W.2d 284 (S.D. 1989) (multiple counts permissible but only one punishment for same offense)
State v. Well, 620 N.W.2d 192 (S.D. 2000) (multiple convictions for the same crime improper absent legislative intent)
State v. Chavez, 649 N.W.2d 586 (S.D. 2002) (cannot punish for multiple offenses from one act unless specifically allowed)
State v. Guziak, 968 N.W.2d 196 (S.D. 2021) (plain error review applicable to unpreserved claims)
Rutledge v. United States, 517 U.S. 292 (1996) (double jeopardy prohibits multiple convictions for same act even without multiple sentences)
Ball v. United States, 470 U.S. 856 (1985) (only one judgment of conviction should be entered for a single criminal act)