*1 Henderson, (S.D.1985), by dis- not be settled the State and tribes and the should not be of 1990 Reconcilia- respect Comity mutual to the senting. and Disappointment effort. long has been a of tribal courts decisions Cheyenne the of the River Chairman I have message of mine. Mexican. time gather- Sioux who observed that the Tribe now, recognize past, that and ings beyond pure go enjoyment should tribal state Dakota we have and South (the indicating thereof that: “If he’s Gover- Leg- systems. As found court nor) jurisdictional things not interested 60, 2nd (pg. legisla- islative Senate Journal the are really tearing and issues that us has de- day), present tive our Governor apart, pull trying there is no sense to year to a Year of Reconcilia- clared be However, thing togеther. It’s rhetoric.” tion, requesting and non-Indians to Indians a positive other leaders took more tribal together. closer Our Governor has come approach ceremony. after the reconciliation make goals, asked us to set to strides to- understanding by Increased the non-Indi- understanding in 1990. He is ward better bring ans and Indians could and about page Rapid in an on quoted article development, economic health care and edu- Journal, 12, as City January follows: people, cation for Indian asserted. fun, only “The end result not be should A deep wound exists the State of respect Chairperson, mutual and trust.” jurisdictional South Dakota virtue of Petersen, Judy who acts as “Chairman” disputes tribal and state between cоurts Tribe, the Flandreau Sioux observed of courts. tell us inher- The Indians that their go beyond pure gathering that the should pre-dates ent sovereignty the Constitutiоn ap- Mickelson enjoyment. Governor thus They of United States. want to decide Indian Affairs peared before the State cases, courts, within tribal involve 11, January on 1990 in an at- Commission people their and their children. court State bring together the and tempt Indian authority actions which undermine the of spirit friendship. community in a of white impermissible infringe- an tribal courts are 1. pg. Id. upon right govern- ment of self tribal Lee, 217, 223, ment. 1, 1990, Williams U.S. February Miekel- On Govеrnor us, 269, 79 S.Ct. 272. Let in the Year of representatives eight of son Reconciliation, peace pursue all avenues of began nine has statе’s Sioux Tribes what jurisdic- open-minded solutions to include the “Year of now been called Reconcilia- non- tional conflict between Indians and cross-legged sat on tion.” Governor Indians this state. of Capitol floor of our rotunda and repre- peace pipe with these Sioux shаred legislators, Filled with state
sentatives. officials, rang
and tribal the rotunda out songs honoring the
with traditional Indian people expressing hope
Indian Journal, 1, City pg. peace. Rapid Feb- Dakota, Plaintiff STATE of South 2, ruary 1990. Appellee, centu- beginning This is of second good It Dakota statehood. of South REED, Defendant James year seek of Indians and whites now that Appellant. understanding beginning and a new racial рeace with another. one No. 16536. moment, Alas, only for a hopefully Supreme of South Dakota. Court understanding as the tide of ebbs 15, Sept. Briefs 1989. on Considered read, flows, via a Febru- South Dakotans Feb. 1990. Decided City that ary Rapid Journal article going “We’re our Governor has said: not He jurisdictional issues.” also ex-
to solve disputes jurisdictional could
pressed *2 degree rape, being
first and with a habitual preliminary hearing At criminal. his three 8-year-old sister, children—his ex-wife’s 6-year-old daughter, his ex-wife’s 8-year-old Reed’s sоn—described incidents vaginal anal and/or intercourse forced baby-sitting. on them Reed when he was addition, 9-year-old step- the ex-wife’s watching son described Reed force the stepson’s 4-year-old perform brother to fellatio on Reed. Reed’s son confirmed this incident. pled guilty
Reed to one count of first degree rape, involving a count the anal state, turn, rape of his son. The remaining rape, attempted rapе, missed the charges following habitual offender sentencing. sentencing presentence report Prior to completed. It revealed that Reed is a mentally 29-year-old ill man with border- abused, intelligence. sexually line He was beaten and tormented his father throughout his childhood. Reed was con- degree rape victed of second in 1979 and charges of sexual contact with a child un- age der the of 16 were dismissed in 1984 Sentencing аnd 1985. recommendations ranged long-term in-patient for Reed psychiatric peni- treatment to the maximum tentiary sentence. Reed himself Harmоn, Gen., Deputy Atty. help. remorse asked for Pierre, plaintiff appellee; Roger Gen., Pierre, Tellinghuisen, Atty. on the twenty- The trial court sentenced Reed to brief. years penitentiary. During five sen- tencing the trial court stressed Reed’s need Pahlke, Shawn Jensen Office of Public judgment provides, for trеatment and the Defender, Rapid City, for defendant and part: appellant.
ORDERED, that first and foremost
get
the Defendant
mental health treat-
MORGAN, Justice.
provisions
ment under the
of the mental
(Reed) pled guilty
James Thomas Reed
*
guilty
illness statutes as
relate to
(SDCL 23A-27-38)
mentally
but
ill
to first
mentally
pleas.
ill
(SDCL 22-22-1)
degree rape
and was sen
Reed now contends that
this sentence
(25)
twenty-five
years
tenced
peni
Eighth
prescrip-
violates the
Amendment’s
tentiary.
аppeal
His sole contention on
is
against
punishment.
cruel and unusual
eighth
this sentence violates his
right against
amendment
cruel and unusual
Every felony sentence is not sub
punishment.
review;
jected
to exhaustive
charged
statutory
Reed was
with five counts of
sentence within the
maximum is
Weiker,
degree rape,
attempted
first
one count of
not disturbed.
*
constitutionality
guilty
mentally
Robinson v.
WUEST, C.J., and SABERS and JJ.,
MILLER, concur.
HENDERSON, J., concurs in part.
and dissents