*1 prevent making the Governor from the “How” or “Means” the Governor must ¶ bill, timely paragraph fact, return of a vetoed delivery. use for In opin- 13 of the IV, § permits of Article the Gover- one provides ion necessity “there is no for such timely make a return nor to of the bill delivery.” In this I respect, would simply “upon reconvening Legislature the advise that the “means” all appro- includes delivery from recess.” As for at [the] electronic, priate delivery, including fac- weekends, night, during over national holi- simile transmission and the more custom- break, during days day the fifteen the ary or traditional delivery. means of Legislature during must stand in recess It Legislature is obvious that the these intervals order to bring pre- the can not shorten the Governor’s time frame ceding legislative day to an end. Accord- delivery service their actions or ingly, paragraph again one would allow a Accordingly, inactions. all other questions reconvening return to be made need not be addressed or answered at this Legislature from such recess. fact, In time. it could be hazardous to do Third, regard your ques- so in view the fact that it is impossible concerning tion three who should receive possible envision all scenarios that could veto from message the Governor order regard arise with to the return of vetoed IV, satisfy requirement Article bills. § 4 that vetoed bills be returned to “the Richard Sabers W. Legislature,” Legislature has itself as- Justice Richard W. Sabers signed responsibility secretary this to “the house, of the senate or chief clerk of the
whichever was the house of origin[.]” See only
SDCL 2-7-20.2. The exception is for presented
bills to the at Governor such deny
time as to the Governor his full five
days to consider them and return any ve-
toed
to the Legislature
bills
before its
Robert A. Amundson
Justice Robert A. Amundson Konenkamp K.
John Konenkamp
Justice John K.
David Gilbertson
Justice David Gilbertson dissenting. Justice majority has not answered portion of question relating TWO *2 stopped the Trooper Boersma the driver. Vocu
pickup approached and by producing his identified himself He was South Dakota driver’s license. ticketed for without a valid driver’s license. Because Vocu did not have valid Trooper
driver’s license Boersma asked seventy-five him dollar bond. post to bond, post was unable to the When Vocu jail him transported Boersma ordered to jail at the was and booked. While Vocu by agents interviewed DCI and read his rights. Miranda Vocu waived his Miranda rights, made statements to the officers to drug the effect he had at his paraphernalia residence and consented to a search of subsequent yielded search residence. marijuana pipe with residue and a scale methamphetamine residue. arrest, a mo- [¶ After his Vocu filed 5.] Barnett, General, Attorney Mark Sherri search, tion of suppress to results General, Wald, Attorney Sundem Assistant arguing governed that SDCL 32-33-2 Pierre, appel- and Attorneys plaintiff for stop required Trooper and Boersma to lee. “promise appear” allow Vocu to Jr., Laubach, D. Office of Public traffic and portion Arnold of the uniform ticket Defender, Attorneys City, for defen- then be released. The trial court conclud- Rapid appellant. dant and ed: Vocu to pro- Because was able
GILBERTSON, Justice. Trooper vide Boersma with a valid driv- license, Trooper Boersma was not ers Vocu was found [¶ Edward Louis 1.] by required SDCL 32-33-2 to immedi- a controlled sub- possession of ately issue a summons and notice of time stance, felony, possession a Class 5 less and release Vocu at marijuana, a pound than one-half stop. Trooper the scene of the traffic misdemeanor, drug possession validly required post Boersma Vocu paraphernalia, a Class bond his release. We affirm. enough
5. Because Vocu did not have bond, money post required Troop- FACTS validly required go er Boersma Highway Trooper Patrol [¶ 2.] When jail, where he would be spotted pickup traveling Boersma Vocu’s seeing bond after the nearest or 28, 1998, May on a Rapid City on street most available drug knew suspected that Vocu was Vocu, taken the Pen- trafficking, might by being involved it that nington County jail, illegally was not day, possibly kept drugs his vehicle. subsequent detained. His consent and Boersma ran a license check discover- interview at expired. ed had He statements made Voeu’s driver’s license jail illegal not tainted plate [sic] also rear license pickup’s noticed light was detention. inoperative. diately by officer before
ISSUE
magis-
the nearest or most accessible
err
it
trial court
when
Did the
Any
vio-
trate.
suppress?
motion to
denied Vocu’s
his written
lates
*3
DISCUSSION
2
regard-
of a Class misdemeanor
that his
agree
and the State
Vocu
[¶ 7.]
of the
disposition
charge upon
less of the
expired
an
license
of
A
originally
which he was
arrested.
pro-
a
of SDCL 32-12-22
violation
arrested for a
nonresident
violation
vides:
re-
any provision
may
of this title
except
expressly
those
ex-
person,
No
in
to
bond
the amount set
quired
§§
in
to
32-12-22.1
empted
pro-
forth on the fine and bond schedule
inclusive,
any motor vehicle
shall drive
court
presiding
vided
circuit
unless such
highway
a
this state
upon
by magis-
or in an amount
a
judge,
set
operator
license as an
person has a valid
offense,
or
for that
trate
chapter.
this
under
being
(emphasis
released from custody,
for a violation of
Any person convicted
added).
2
of a
section shall be
32-33-2 Vocu had
[¶ 10.] Under SDCL
address,
name and
the li-
produce
to
his
au-
Accordingly, SDCL 23A-3-2
[¶ 8.]
he
cense number of the motor
vehicle
to arrest Vocu.
Trooper
thorized
Boersma
and his driver’s license before he
driving,
provides,
part:
That statute
upon
ap-
released
his
to
could be
promise
may,
officer
without
A law enforcement
what he char-
produced
While Vocu
pear.
warrant,
person:
arrest a
a
license,
an
driver’s
acterizes as
offense, other than a
public
For a
what
32-33-
produce
was unable to
SDCL
offense,
attempted
petty
committed
authorizing
him
requires, a valid license
presence!.]
upon
vehicle
Dako-
to drive a motor
contends, however,
32-33-2 does not rec-
highways.
ta
SDCL
[¶ 9.]
Trooper Boersma
being
32-33-2
driver’s licenses as
ognize non-valid
custody after he
to release Vocu from
pur-
For
with the statute.
compliance
promise
appear.
written
to
signed the
statute, an
compliance
with this
poses
provides:
revoked,
altered
expired, suspended,.
is the same as no
forged driver’s license
specifically provid-
Except as otherwise
Vocu was not authorized
ed,
driver’s license.
a
is arrested for a
person
whenever
32-12-22.
vehicle. SDCL
any provision of this title
tó drive his
violation of
misdemeanor,
the ar-
would have violated his
punishable
Trooper
as
Boersma
shall take the name and
resting officer
officer had he
duty as a law enforcement
and the license
person
address
promise
Vocu to
allowed
and driv-
number
his motor vehicle
To
otherwise
simply
away.
drive
hold
and issue a summons or
er’s license
and unreasonable
would create
absurd
writing
ap-
him in
notify
otherwise
not intend.
legislature
that the
did
result
specified
at a time and
to be
pear
36,
Trownsell, 1998 SD
Dahn v.
time
or notice. The
summons
also,
Brassfield,
v.
535. See
State
N.W.2d
ar-
at least five
after the
shall be
¶
110, 15, 615 N.W.2d
2000 SD
arrested demands
person
rest unless the
had the author-
Trooper Boersma
The
hearing.
an earlier
jail under
23A-
bring Vocu to
ity to
promise
person’s
shall
him
releasing
pursuant
than
3-2 rather
custody.
him
release
from
Mi-
Vocu then waived his
refusing
give
a written
Any person
rights
gave permission
taken imme-
randa
shall be
punish-
Title 32 which is
Consequently, the
violation of SDCL
apartment.1
search his
misdemeanor,
able as
by denying
not err
Vocu’s
trial court did
specifically
otherwise
Smith,
applies “[e]xcept as
suppress.
State
motion
provides:
provided.”
N.W.2d 344.
SD 599
Except
specifically provid-
as otherwise
Affirmed.
ed,
person
whenever a
is arrested for
any provision of this title
violation of
Justice,
MILLER,
Chief
misdemeanor,
as a
the ar-
punishable
Justice,
KONENKAMP,
concur.
take the name and
resting officer shall
AMUNDSON,
and the license
address
number of his motor vehicle and driver’s
Justices, dissent.
*4
other-
license and issue a summons or
(dissenting).
Justice
him in
at a
notify
writing
appear
wise
set forth
I dissent for the reasons
specified
time and
to be
and those
in
Amundson’s dissent
Justice
or notice. The time shall be
summons
my
in
dissent in State v. Brass
set forth
five
after the arrest unless
at least
field, 2000 SD
hearing. arresting The officer shall AMUNDSON, (dissenting). Justice person’s promise written custody. Any release him from I dissent. respectfully [¶ 16.] refusing give prom- a written person case, present In the Vocu and the immediately appear ise to shall be taken agree state that his offense of with arresting officer before the near- is a violation of SDCL license magistrate. Any or most accessible est 32-12-22, provides: which who violates his person ex- person, except expressly No those a promise guilty is §§ empted in 32-12-22.1 to regardless 2 misdemeanor of the Class inclusive, any shall drive motor vehicle he disposition charge upon which upon highway a this state unless such A originally arrested. nonresident person operator has a valid license as an any provision for a violation of arrested chapter. under may of this title be a Any person convicted for violation of bond in the amount set forth on the fine of a this section shall provided by pre- and bond schedule or in an siding judge, circuit court by magistrate amount set a Generally, offi- law enforcement offense, being released from may person cers arrest without a war- custody. “[fjor offense, than a public rant other (1998). offense, procedure This is petty attempted committed or 23A-3-2(l) petty with offense motor vehicle presence.” See SDCL consistent (1998). person When a is arrested for a violations.2 although validity Dakota driver's license not 1. Vocu does not contest the of his South rights validity waiver his Miranda nor the possession, give a written in his immediate voluntary of his consent to the search of his hearing at the to the residence. complaint officer who served the on him. If he does not have a valid South Dakota provides: 2. SDCL 23-1A-11 license, may immediately either driver's Any person who has been served with a deposit give a an admission and petty complaint for a violation of a § accordance with 23-1A-12 or file de- relating operation to the and use of statute § posit with 23-1A-13. If he in accordance may, if he a valid a motor vehicle has alternative, taken refuses either he shall be possession or Dakota driver’s license in his immediately most accessi- to the nearest or satisfactory is if the proof shown person does have a valid 32-12-65(1) excluded specifically is 32-33 contains SDCL Chapter [¶ 19.] SDCL 32- delineating exceptions from SDCL 32-33-2. Under SDCL two statutes first, 12-65(1), The 32-33- 32-33-2. SDCL 2.1, provides: [a]ny person who drives a motor vehicle 32-33-3 do not 32-33-2 and Sections of this state at a any public highway on arrested any person apply privilege time when his is § a violation of charged with of a Class 1 Revoked is may arresting officer 32-22-21. misdemeanor[.] immediately before the person take the specifically excluded legislature While and most accessible
nearest 32-12-65(1) from the reach of referred to these sections The violations 32-33-2, it did exclude the re- dealing with the 2 misdemeanors are Class provides: mainder of that which maxi- of vehicles and the weight maximum equipped vehicles weight mum Any a motor vehicle drives pneumatic tires. See 32-22-16 and at highway of this state public on privilege time when his dealing with The second statute *5 32-33-2 is SDCL 32- exceptions (2) 2 Suspended guilty is of a Class
33^1, which states: misdemeanor; and 32-33-3 do Sections 32-33-2 any person arrested apply to is of a Class Cancelled causing or con- charged with an offense inju- resulting'in to an accident tributing 32-12-65(2)-(3). Further, See any any person, nor to ry or death 32- legislature also failed to exclude SDCL driving, person charged with reckless under, 12-22, the' Vocu was cited statute any person charged with nor application from the under the influence of an alcoholic while (1998) (dealing with See SDCL 32-12-18’ any drug controlled or sub- beverage or n previously oper- of'all issued the surrender marijuana, any person nor to stance or for a new applying ators licenses before a violation of subdivision charged with license). 32-12-65(1) any § nor to not follow Trooper Boersma did arresting officer has person who the procedures set forth any cause to believe has committed good produce was able to though even shall felony. A law enforcement officer requires and his unnecessary what that without take such applica- its has not been excluded from. nearest or most accessi- delay before the the, appropriate appli- tion.3 Based ble punishable hearing offenses as magistrate on the or of traffic ble for misdemeanors, particular. In the complaint. specifically prescribed statu- Any person violates absence'of may proceed given tory procedure, a in accor- court section, any is not inconsistent with dance with the of this lawful manner applicable statute. a Class 2 misdemeanor. Title 23A or other procedure proper SDCL 23A-45-13. previously interpreted 3. has not This Court speed violations prosecution for exceptions. v. In State its ap- together various pieced must be Dale, 687, (S.D.1985) 360 N.W.2d 23A-1, chs. plicable sections of SDCL applicable to did find SDCL 32-33-2 Court 32-25 and 32-33. observe, how- speeding cases. This did Court 1968, analyzing the without Id. at 689. In ever, gener- exceptions, attorney statute or its opined: Legislature al has not South Dakota [t]he controlling law my opinion that the separate procedure It is established subjects ARREST and BAIL general, on the prosecution of misdemeanors statutory cation of construction and the case, applicable
statutes to this I would re-
verse.
STATE Plaintiff Appellee, BRASSFIELD,
Fredrick D. Defendant Appellant.
No. 21174.
Supreme Court of South Dakota. 22,
Considered on Briefs March 2000.
Reassigned July Aug.
Decided *6 statute, Supp. to be found in SDC nothing 34.16 and the I find or else- where, applicable case law to indicate that SDC thereto. 44.0502 any way supersede would supplant [basically SDC 44.0502 the law of ARREST and BAIL as found in appears provide only 32-33-4] Supp. per- SDC 34.16 and the case law an alternative method which an arrest- taining thereto. ing may proceed to effectuate the opinion I am therefore of the that SDC appearances of the arrested mandatory. 44.0502 is not appropriate magistrate. Op. Att’y 1967-1968 Gen. 432.