## Facts

- On the night of May 1, 1975, the Coast-to-Coast store in Wagner, South Dakota was burglarized, and several rifles, shotguns, and ammunition were stolen.
- Seven members of the Yankton Sioux Tribe—Mark Winckler, Mike Weston, Jesse Costello, Mike Honomichl, Jim Weddell, Donald Cournoyer, and Godwin Weston—were implicated in the theft.
- Around 3:00 a.m. on May 2, 1975, the seven defendants went onto Yankton Sioux trust land, broke into the Yankton Sioux Tribe Pork Plant (a tribal-owned facility), and occupied it while armed.
- Law enforcement surrounded the pork plant by roughly 7:00 a.m., and a daylong standoff followed.
- During the standoff, shots were fired from inside the pork plant in the direction of law enforcement; at least some officers were positioned outside Indian trust land.
- The defendants surrendered at about 8:30 p.m. and were arrested. After the surrender, the stolen guns and ammunition were found inside the pork plant, and no other people were found on the premises.
- In South Dakota state court, the defendants were charged with burglary and grand larceny for the store theft and with three counts of assault with a dangerous weapon (without intent to kill) for firing toward officers.
- Before trial, the circuit court dismissed the assault counts for lack of jurisdiction, reasoning that the defendants were Indians and the shooting conduct occurred on Indian trust land.
- The defendants were jointly tried on the burglary and grand larceny counts and convicted. The defendants appealed their convictions, and the State appealed the dismissal of the assault counts; the matters were consolidated.

## Issues

1. Whether South Dakota had criminal jurisdiction to prosecute Indian defendants for assault with a dangerous weapon when the shots were fired from Indian trust land but the threatened harm extended into state territory where officers were located.
2. Whether the trial court committed reversible error in trying the defendants together and whether the evidence was sufficient to sustain the burglary and grand larceny convictions.

## Decision

- The Supreme Court of South Dakota reversed the order dismissing the assault counts, holding that South Dakota could exercise jurisdiction because the offense was completed, at least in part, in state territory when the bullets traveled beyond Indian trust land and endangered officers there.
- The court affirmed the burglary and grand larceny convictions, concluding the evidence was sufficient, including the defendants’ control over recently stolen firearms found inside the occupied pork plant and the absence of other persons on the premises.
- The court found no abuse of discretion in denying severance and allowing a joint trial on the burglary and larceny charges.
- The case was remanded for further proceedings on the reinstated assault charges.

## Legal Principles

- A state may prosecute a crime when a material part of the criminal conduct, or the result/effect of that conduct, occurs within the state’s territorial jurisdiction.
- For gunfire crossing a boundary, the offense may be treated as occurring where the projectiles travel and come to rest; the fact that the intended harm was not achieved does not eliminate the offense’s effect in the forum.
- Indian status and the fact that some conduct occurred in Indian Country do not automatically bar state prosecution when an element or harmful effect of the charged offense occurs in state territory.
- Possession of recently stolen property, if not credibly explained, is a circumstance from which a jury may infer participation in theft-related offenses, especially when the property is found in a location under the defendants’ control.
- A motion to sever based on obtaining a codefendant’s testimony depends on whether the defendant shows (1) a desire to use the codefendant’s testimony, (2) that the testimony would be exculpatory, and (3) that the codefendant would in fact testify at a separate trial.

## Conclusion

State v. Winckler held that South Dakota could prosecute assault-with-a-dangerous-weapon charges arising from shots fired by Indian defendants from trust land when the bullets and the danger to officers extended into state territory, reversed the dismissal of those assault counts, and affirmed the defendants’ burglary and grand larceny convictions based on sufficient circumstantial evidence and proper joinder in a joint trial.


State v. Winckler, 260 N.W.2d 356 (1977)