# State v. Huber

> South Dakota Supreme Court · September 26, 1984 · 356 N.W.2d 468

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9717721

## Case

- **Full name:** STATE of South Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Ronald Carl HUBER, Defendant and Appellant
- **Court:** South Dakota Supreme Court
- **Decided:** September 26, 1984
- **Citations:** 356 N.W.2d 468; 1984 S.D. LEXIS 377
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Dunn
- **Judges:** Henderson, Dunn, Fosheim, Wollman, Morgan, Wuest
- **Cited by:** 46 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9717721

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that the legislature’s use of the word “intentionally” when defining the crime of eluding police does not create a specific intent crime
- holding "[m]ere use of the term intentionally does not designate an additional mental state beyond that accompanying the act"

## Opinion text

DUNN, Justice
(concurring in part, dissenting in part).
I would reverse the aggravated assault conviction. The information and the specific jury instruction on aggravated assault failed to include an essential element of the crime. This was in spite of the fact that the error was called to the attention of the trial court at the time of trial.
I would affirm the convictions on the remaining charges.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9717721. Public record. Not legal advice.