State v. Rosales

860 N.W.2d 251 (S.D. 2015)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D set fire to two vehicles owned by Amy Faehnrich and Toby Rolfe. The fire spread to their garage, which was located approximately four feet from the vehicles. The fires were started by the ignition of a flammable liquid on their hoods and windshields. The garage fire started because of its close proximity to the vehicles. Officers apprehended D. D was indicted on five counts: (1) reckless burning, (2) intentional damage to property in the first degree, (3) intentional damage to property in the first degree, (4) possession of a controlled substance, and (5) possession of marijuana. D was found guilty on all five counts. D appealed. D argues that 'it is a legal impossibility to intentionally damage a vehicle by fire. A person is guilty of intentional damage to property if he or she, 'with specific intent to do so, injures, damages, or destroys private property in which any other person has an interest, without the consent of the other person. The statute also provides that its provisions do not apply if the intentional damage to property was accomplished by arson or reckless burning pursuant to chapter 22-33. D argues that the intentional damage to property statute and the arson statutes are mutually exclusive. D argues that setting the two cars on fire was arson or reckless burning.