Dale v. City of Sioux Falls

9 Citing cases

  1. State v. Schwaller

    2006 S.D. 30 (S.D. 2006)   Cited 12 times

    The right to appeal is statutory and therefore does not exist in the absence of a statute permitting it.'" Dale v. City of Sioux Falls, 2003 SD 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894 (citing State v. Hoxeng, 315 N.W.2d 308, 308 (S.D. 1982)). "The appellate jurisdiction of this Court will not be presumed but must affirmatively appear from the record.

  2. State v. Sharpfish

    2019 S.D. 49 (S.D. 2019)   Cited 3 times   1 Legal Analyses

    We "take notice of jurisdictional questions, whether presented by the parties or not." Schwaller , 2006 S.D. 30, ¶ 5, 712 N.W.2d at 871 (quoting Dale v. City of Sioux Falls, 2003 S.D. 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894 ). [¶13.] The State contends that we have jurisdiction to hear its appeal under SDCL 23A-32-5, which provides:

  3. Stoebner v. Konrad

    2018 S.D. 47 (S.D. 2018)   Cited 1 times

    Analysis [¶ 6.] Whether presented by the parties or not, we are required to take notice of jurisdictional questions. Dale v. City of Sioux Falls , 2003 S.D. 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894. "This Court has only ‘such appellate jurisdiction as may be provided by the Legislature.’ " State v. Stenstrom , 2017 S.D. 61, ¶ 15, 902 N.W.2d 787, 791 (quoting S.D. Const. art. 5, § 5 ).

  4. Wegner v. Siemers

    2018 S.D. 76 (S.D. 2018)   Cited 3 times

    ]" SDCL 16-12B-16 (emphasis added); accord SDCL 16-12A-27.1. Accordingly, Siemers had a right to appeal the magistrate court’s order to the circuit court, but we see no statutory authority to appeal directly to this Court. [¶ 6.] We have previously recognized that appellate jurisdiction from a magistrate court’s decision is limited to the circuit court. Dale v. City of Sioux Falls , 2003 S.D. 124, ¶ 8, 670 N.W.2d 892, 895 ; Schwaller , 2006 S.D. 30, ¶ 8, 712 N.W.2d at 871. "[W]ith the one exception provided by SDCL 23A-32-5 (appeals by the State from certain pre-trial orders of a circuit court or magistrate), there is no right of direct appeal from magistrate court to the Supreme Court."State v. Hoxeng , 315 N.W.2d 308, 309 (S.D. 1982).

  5. In re Issuance of a Summons Compelling

    908 N.W.2d 160 (S.D. 2018)   Cited 4 times

    The right to appeal is statutory and therefore does not exist in the absence of a statute permitting it.’ " State v. Schwaller , 2006 S.D. 30, ¶ 5, 712 N.W.2d 869, 871 (quoting Dale v. City of Sioux Falls , 2003 S.D. 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894 ). [¶ 9.] The State’s argument is premised on its categorization of the appealed orders as criminal matters.

  6. In re Issuance of a Summons Compelling an Essential Witness

    2018 S.D. 16 (S.D. 2018)   Cited 3 times

    The right to appeal is statutory and therefore does not exist in the absence of a statute permitting it.'" State v. Schwaller, 2006 S.D. 30, ¶ 5, 712 N.W.2d 869, 871 (quoting Dale v. City of Sioux Falls, 2003 S.D. 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894). [¶9.] The State's argument is premised on its categorization of the appealed orders as criminal matters. The State recognizes the possibility that the proceedings are civil in nature, citing Codey ex rel. State of New Jersey v. Capital Cities, American Broadcasting Corp., 626 N.E.2d 636 (N.Y. 1993), and acknowledges that if the proceedings are civil, then the case may be appealable under SDCL 15-26A-3(2) or (4). Wilkie and M.M.W. assert that the case is properly appealed as a matter of right under SDCL 15-26A-3 and SDCL 15-26A-4.

  7. State v. Stenstrom

    2017 S.D. 61 (S.D. 2017)   Cited 5 times
    Holding no statute authorizes appellate review of actions taken by a drug court program

    This Court is "required to take notice of jurisdictional questions, whether presented by the parties or not." State v. Schwaller, 2006 S.D. 30, ¶ 5, 712 N.W.2d 869, 871 (quoting Dale v. City of Sioux Falls, 2003 S.D. 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894 ). [¶16.] Even so, this Court does have appellate jurisdiction over the circuit court's decision to revoke the suspension of execution of Stenstrom's sentence. Within the context of revocation, the actions of a drug-court program may be considered indirectly when a drug-court participant resists a motion for revocation by alleging her termination from the drug-court program was the result of some mistake or impropriety on the part of the program.

  8. In Interest of S.M.D.N

    2004 S.D. 5 (S.D. 2004)   Cited 4 times

    The right to appeal is statutory and does not exist in the absence of a statute permitting it." State v. Reath, 2003 SD 144, ¶ 4, 673 N.W.2d 294 (quoting Dale v. City of Sioux Falls, 2003 SD 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894). "The appellate jurisdiction of this Court will not be presumed but must affirmatively appear from the record." Double Diamond Construction v. Farmers Coop. Elev. Ass'n. of Beresford, 2003 SD 9, ¶ 6, 656 N.W.2d 744, 746.

  9. State v. Reath

    2003 S.D. 144 (S.D. 2003)   Cited 2 times
    In Reath, we dismissed the prosecution’s appeal of an order granting the defendant’s motion for judgment of acquittal in the midst of a jury trial, concluding we lacked appellate jurisdiction.

    The right to appeal is statutory and does not exist in the absence of a statute permitting it.'" Dale v. City of Sioux Falls, 2003 SD 124, ¶ 6, 670 N.W.2d 892, 894 (citations omitted). "This Court is also required to take notice of jurisdictional questions whether presented by the parties or not.