Note: Beginning in June 2012, opinions will be posted as Adobe PDFs. You can download a free copy of Adobe Reader here.
The summary following each opinion is prepared to offer lawyers and the public a general overview of what a particular opinion decides. The summary is not necessarily a full description of the issues discussed in an opinion.
10-4-2007 - Opinions
In this zoning case, Appellants appeal the master-in-equity's decision to void a planned development.
10-5-2007 - Opinions
In this PCR appeal, the court must decide the efficacy of Doyle v. Ohio as juxtaposed to the holding by the United States Supreme Court in Brecht v. Abrahamson.
In this PCR case, the issue posited is whether the PCR court committed error in granting relief where allegedly no evidence of prejudice was presented and where the plea court conducted a thorough and encompassing guilty plea proceeding.
In this family court case, the appellate entity addresses several issues; (1) criminal contempt as juxtaposed to civil contempt in the family court arena and (2) an award of attorney’s fees bottomed and premised upon a contempt order by the family court.
In this criminal appeal the Appellant posits the following issues: (1) The applicability and efficacy of the ruling by the U.S. Supreme Court in Holmes v. South Carolina; (2) Did the trial court correctly allow the testimony of an officer where the testimony was offered to rebut Appellant’s attempt to persuade the jury she was anxious to aid the investigation or was it rank hearsay; (3) Did the testimony of the prosecution’s witness, Heidi Feagin, meet the test of identification evidence under the factual scenario of the record; (4) Did the trial court correctly allow admission of records from the Appellant’s former employer within the business records exception of Rule 803(6), SCRE; and (5) Did the trial court commit error in refusing to give the jury a curative instruction when the Solicitor asked the jury to give the victim’s widow “peace” and “justice as well?”
10-9-2007 - Opinions
In this contempt action seeking past due child support, the Court of Appeals affirmed the family court's award of child support arrearage and attorney's fees to Father. The court held that despite the emancipation of one of the two supported minor children, Mother was not entitled to unilaterally reduce her support payments without an order of the family court.
10-11-2007 - Opinions
In this case we hold the PCR court has authority to issue Rule 11 sanctions against a PCR applicant.
Kathleen M. Bartlett appeals the family court's order finding her former husband, James P. Rachels, was not in contempt of court for allegedly violating a provision of the parties' 1996 divorce decree and denying her request for attorney's fees. We affirm.
10-17-2007 - Opinions
In this criminal case, the appellate court considers whether the circuit court erred by: (1) refusing to suppress Appellant’s statement because allegedly the police in South Carolina agreed to drop North Carolina charges; and (2) whether Appellant’s statement to police was freely and voluntarily given under the totality of circumstances test where Appellant contends the statement was given because of a promise by police to “help him.”
10-19-2007 - Opinions
Herbert Gault appeals the circuit court's affirmance of his conviction of disorderly conduct. He argues the magistrate court erred in refusing to direct a verdict in his favor and in improperly excluding relevant evidence. We affirm.
The court affirms the circuit judge's determination that the magistrate had authority to grant summary judgment and did not abuse his discretion in doing so where plaintiff was unable to establish successor liability.
In this criminal case Miller appeals his conviction for conspiracy to traffic methamphetamine, arguing the trial judge erred by: (1) admitting incriminating oral and written statements, which he claims were given as the result of promises of leniency; and (2) denying his motion to enforce an alleged eight-to-twelve-year plea agreement.
10-26-2007 - Opinions
Tommy Hutto appeals the trial court's deniel of PCR from his conviction for burglary, criminal sexual conduct and armed robbery claiming the trial court erred in not finding his trial counsel was ineffective. We affirmed.