THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court

David Ray Matthews, Petitioner,

v.

State of South Carolina, Respondent.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Appeal From Darlington County
John H. Waller, Jr., Trial Judge
Edward B. Cottingham, Post-Conviction Judge

Opinion No. 25487
Submitted December 13, 2001 - Filed June 17, 2002

REVERSED

Deputy Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for petitioner.

Attorney General Charles M. Condon, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General B. Allen Bullard, Jr., and Assistant Attorney General David Spencer, all of Columbia, for respondent.

JUSTICE BURNETT: David Ray Matthews ("Matthews") appeals the denial of post-conviction relief ("PCR"). We reverse.

FACTS/PROCEDURAL HISTORY

The State Grand Jury indicted David Ray Matthews ("Matthews") along with twenty-one others for trafficking cocaine in excess of 400 grams.⁽¹⁾ The solicitor, in addition to other errors,⁽²⁾ vouched for the credibility of a State's witness by stating during her summation:

Now, you may not have liked Bimbo Hudson. I didn't like Bimbo Hudson. I don't have to like him. All I have to do is determine whether or not he is a credible witness. I don't trust any of these people until I corroborate their testimony. And once I corroborate their testimony, yes, I put them on the witness stand because they were the ones that were there, they were the ones that can tell it.

(emphasis added). A jury convicted Matthews of the indicted charge. After unsuccessfully challenging his conviction on appeal, he instituted this PCR.

At the PCR hearing, Matthews' trial counsel testified he believed the remarks were improper but felt continual objections would adversely affect his client. The PCR judge denied relief finding Matthews failed to carry his burden of proof that counsel rendered ineffective assistance.

ANALYSIS

Matthews argues counsel rendered ineffective assistance by failing to object to solicitor's comments vouching for the credibility of the State's witness. We agree.

The applicant bears the burden to prove allegations in a PCR. Butler v. State, 286 S.C. 441, 334 S.E.2d 813 (1985), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 1094, 106 S.Ct. 869, 88 L.Ed.2d 908 (1986). To prove ineffective assistance of counsel, the applicant must show trial counsel's performance fell below an objective standard of reasonableness and, but for counsel's errors, there is a reasonable pr