SD Supreme Court rules 'Stand Your Ground' law can't be applied retroactively

Annie Todd, Sioux Falls Argus Leader
·2 min read
91
South Dakota Chief Justice Steven Jensen ask questions during a Supreme Court hearing in Brookings on March 23, 2023.

The South Dakota Supreme Court ruled Thursday the state’s “Stand Your Ground” law could not be retroactively applied to a 2019 Sioux Falls murder case.

Ramon Smith was found guilty of second-degree murder and three counts of aggravated assault after a June 2019 altercation led to smith shooting, Larry Carr, who later died of his injuries, and Jevon Allen and Josh Allen, both of whom survived.

Smith was sentenced to life in prison without parole.

Throughout the court process, Smith claimed he had acted in self-defense, according to court documents.

More: Supreme Court hears arguments in test of South Dakota's 'Stand Your Ground' law

Prior to Smith’s 2021 trial, the state passed a statutory immunity law, according to the Supreme Court decision. Smith’s attorneys then moved to dismiss his charges because of the new law. A Minnehaha County circuit court judge denied the motion, explaining that the new law didn’t apply retroactively and that the Legislature did not “explicitly provide that it was to be applied retroactively.”

Smith’s attorney had argued the immunity law was a procedural law, meaning that it regulates the steps of the criminal court process, and that retroactivity applied. He added if the immunity law was procedural, then a step in the process had been missed.

In the unanimous decision written by Chief Justice Steven Jensen, the justices disagreed with Smith’s attorney and found the law was substantive, meaning the law describes the criminal act and the punishment, and because of that, is “not retroactive by its own terms.”

More: Man threatens to shoot group with hand disguised as gun, according to Sioux Falls police

The justices also found that Smith’s use of Kentucky case law in his argument was “misplaced” because it didn’t match up with South Dakota’s case law recognizing that immunity is substantive.

The justices sided with the circuit court over three additional appeals in Smith’s case including that the court was right to allow the prosecution to introduce evidence Smith couldn’t legally possess a firearm, denying motions for acquittal and denying a motion for a mistrial.

This article originally appeared on Sioux Falls Argus Leader: SD's Stand Your Ground law can't be applied retroactively: Supreme Court