 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
State v. Hagan9/1/1999
motion in limine was discussed in some detail at a pretrial motions hearing and defense counsel himself noted its limitations as follows:
MR. RENSCH: Well, I don't think it's fair for them in this case to get up and start talking about any drug use -- possible drug use by Jack Hagan prior to this -- I mean, prior to the evening of this incident. Getting into the fact that they may believe him to be a drug dealer or a drug user or -- and all of that would have occurred beforehand. I'm not talking about the specific night in question. (emphasis added).
All of Shoemaker's references to Hagan's drug use were about his search for methamphetamine on the night of the incident. Clearly the testimony did not violate the order on the motion in limine as defense counsel himself interpreted it. Hagan's contrary contention is meritless.
[ ] Affirmed.
[ ] MILLER, Chief Justice, and SABERS, AMUNDSON, KONENKAMP, and GILBERTSON, Justices, participating.
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 South Dakota DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|