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.
7-12-2017 - Opinions
Charleston County (the County) appeals the circuit court's grant of summary judgment to the South Carolina Department of Transportation (the Department). The County argues the court erred in finding (1) the Department is exempt from complying with the Charleston County Zoning and Land Development Regulations Ordinance (the ZLDR), and (2) the ZLDR is an unconstitutional tax on the Department's maintenance of the state highway system.
In this criminal appeal, John William Dobbins, Jr., appeals his convictions for manufacturing methamphetamine, possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, unlawful disposal of methamphetamine waste, possession of a schedule-two controlled substance, and possession of a schedule-four controlled substance. Dobbins asserts the circuit court erred in denying his motion to suppress because law enforcement officers violated the Fourth Amendment by entering his backyard and home without a warrant.
Kan Enterprises, Inc. d/b/a A1 Food Stores appeals the administrative law court's (ALC) denial of its application to renew an off-premises beer and wine permit. Kan argues the ALC erred in (1) misapplying the law, relying upon unsubstantiated opinion testimony, and failing to support its decision with the evidence; (2) depriving it of a vested interest; and (3) violating its constitutional rights.
Appellant Sandy Lynn Westmoreland appeals his convictions for murder and hit and run involving a death. He argues the trial court erred by allowing the coroner to testify the cause of the victim's death was a homicide and instructing the jury that voluntary intoxication was not a defense.
7-19-2017 - Opinions
Jo Pradubsri appeals his convictions for trafficking in crack cocaine, possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine within proximity of a school, and unlawful carrying of a pistol. Pradubsri argues the trial court erred when it (1) refused to reveal an informant's identity, (2) found reasonable suspicion existed to justify his traffic stop, (3) gave a reversible jury instruction on reasonable doubt, (4) refused to grant a directed verdict on the proximity charge, and (5) erroneously allowed testimony from a former co-defendant that Pradubsri manufactured crack cocaine in his residence and had participated in a drug sale immediately before the traffic stop.
Lorenzo Young appeals his convictions of murder, kidnapping, burglary, and attempted armed robbery, arguing the trial court abused its discretion in admitting a letter written by his codefendant Trenton Barnes at their joint trial under the Declaration Against Interest Exception to the Hearsay Rule, SCRE 804(b)(3).
7-26-2017 - Opinions
Appellant Preston Ryan Oates seeks review of his convictions for voluntary manslaughter and possession of a weapon during the commission of a violent crime. Appellant also challenges the denial of his motion for immunity from prosecution pursuant to the Protection of Persons and Property Act. Appellant argues the circuit court erred in denying his motion for immunity because (1) there was evidence that the victim was attempting to forcibly remove Appellant from his occupied vehicle and (2) the circuit court's finding that the conflict had resolved at the time of the shooting was not supported by the evidence. Appellant also challenges the circuit court's refusal to direct a verdict of acquittal on the ground that the State failed to disprove self-defense. Finally, Appellant assigns error to the circuit court's granting of the State's request to give a voluntary manslaughter instruction to the jury on the ground that there was no evidence of sudden heat of passion. We affirm.
Wallace Steve Perry appeals his convictions for two counts of first-degree criminal sexual conduct (CSC) and two counts of second-degree CSC. He argues the trial court erred in (1) finding his former stepdaughter's testimony was admissible as evidence of a common scheme or plan and (2) allowing a doctor to improperly comment on the veracity of his daughter's testimony. We affirm.