 | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Major Cities in South Dakota with Drug Rehab and Treatment Centers:
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
|
866-407-4380
|
Drug Rehab South Dakota
is here to help people with drug and/or alcohol abuse problems in South Dakota. find treatment options. Due to our diverse networking system we can find a treatment option tailored to each individuals specific situation and needs. We are able to provide all phases of recovery included but not limited to, alcohol and/or drug intervention, drug and/or alcohol detox, in-patient treatment, out-patient treatment, short term treatment (30 days or less), long term treatment (90 days or longer).
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We design personalized treatment programs to provide each abuser with the greatest chance of a successful recovery outcome. Our comprehensive networking system works hand in hand with all of the drug treatment centers in South Dakota. At Drug Rehab South Dakota we know that each individual is unique and are treated as such. Deciding upon a treatment option in South Dakota, or anywhere can be a daunting task for any individual or family, we will guide you through each step of a comprehensive treatment plan for you or your loved one. We are determined in our mission, that every drug and/or alcohol abuser in South Dakota. that has a desire to change their life will be given a chance to recover from their addiction and we are dedicated to ensuring that they are given the opportunity to do so.
|
|
We realize that each individual in South Dakota. is in a different financial situation and we will find treatment options for each individual regardless of their financial situation. No matter what your financial situation everyone will receive the treatment help they are looking for.
|
|
|
|
866-407-4380
|
|
Supreme Court upholds prison sentence in South Dakota drug casePIERRE, South Dakota - The South Dakota Supreme Court on Thursday upheld the 10-year prison sentence of a Sioux City, Iowa, man convicted for possession of methamphetamine.
The Supreme Court rejected Damien Garber's argument that his constitutional right to remain silent was violated when he was questioned by the judge who presided over his sentencing hearing.
The high court said an accused person's right to remain silent extends through the sentencing phase of a case, but Garber voluntarily gave up that right when he testified at the sentencing hearing and answered the judge's questions.
Garber, 29, and two acquaintances were arrested June 21, 2002, after a Union County deputy sheriff stopped their vehicle on Interstate 29. The deputy smelled alcohol and also suspected some of the occupants had smoked marijuana.
Officers searched the trunk and found a bag belonging to Garber that contained a pound of marijuana and 110 grams of methamphetamine. They also found an electronic scale.
A test showed Garber had methamphetamine in his body. He was charged with two counts of possession of a controlled substance, ingestion of a drug, possession of marijuana, possession of drug paraphernalia and having an open container of alcohol in a motor vehicle.
In a hearing conducted by Circuit Judge Boyd McMurchie, Garber pleaded guilty to one count of possession of methamphetamine in August 2002. McMurchie was transferred to another part of the circuit before Garber was sentenced.
Circuit Judge Glen Eng, who presided over Garber's sentencing, questioned Garber about the incident that led to his arrest. Garber said he owned the bag in the trunk but didn't know there were drugs in it.
Eng read comments Garber made to an acquaintance while both were in the back seat of a police car, unaware they were being recorded. Garber told the other man he had not thought police would find the drugs.
Garber continued to deny the drugs in the bag were his. Eng said he did not believe Garber and sentenced him to 10 years in prison, the maximum allowed for such an offense.
Garber argued that his sentence should be overturned because Eng violated his right to remain silent during the sentencing hearing by questioning him.
In a unanimous decision, the Supreme Court said that while Garber had the right to remain silent in his sentencing hearing, he surrendered that right when he decided to testify, answered the judge's questions and failed to object to the judge's questions.
When Garber testified that he did not know about the drugs in his clothes bag, the judge was justified in finding that he was not telling the truth, the Supreme Court said.
"There is no constitutional right to lie," Chief Justice David Gilbertson wrote for the court. "It was Garber's lack of candor which prejudiced him, not the exercise of his opportunity to speak on his own behalf."
The Supreme Court also rejected Garber's contention that his sentence was too harsh. The driver of the vehicle received 10 years probation and 90 days in jail. Another passenger, who was pregnant, remained free on bond and was to be sentenced after she gave birth.
The Supreme Court noted that while Garber had no prior felony convictions, he admitted to a long history of drug abuse. Evidence also indicated Garber had an extensive connection to the drug underworld, and he failed to show the other defendants had similar histories, the high court said.
The justices said Garber has not demonstrated that his sentence amounted to unconstitutionally cruel and unusual punishment.
Garber will be eligible for parole in June 2005.
Drug Rehab by County
|
|
More...