Supreme Court Seal
South Carolina
JUDICIAL DEPARTMENT
Site Map | Feedback
Supreme Court Published Opinions - December 2016

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.

12-7-2016 - Opinions

27686 - In the Matter of John Locklair

This is a disciplinary opinion in which the Court disbars a lawyer.

27687 - Kinard v. State

In this opinion, the Court finds the post-conviction relief judge applied the incorrect standard in determining the PCR applicant knowingly and intelligently waived his right to direct appeal, but affirms the issue on appeal.

27688 - In the Matter of David Reuwer

In this opinion, the Court publicly reprimands David Paul Reuwer for violations of various attorney disciplinary rules.

27689 - In the Matter of John Owens

The Court disbars John Kevin Owens retroactively to the date of his interim suspension, Mary 5, 2014.

27690 - State v. Berry

The Court affirms as modified the Court of Appeals decision in State v. Berry, 413 S.C. 118, 775 S.E.2d 51 (Ct. App. 2015).

12-14-2016 - Opinions

27691 - Robertson v. State

In this capital Post-Conviction Relief ("PCR") case, Petitioner filed a second PCR application alleging, among other things, that his prior PCR counsel were not qualified under section 17-27-160(B) of the South Carolina Code. We reverse the PCR judge's summary dismissal and remand for a determination of whether prior PCR counsel were statutorily qualified to represent Petitioner in capital PCR proceedings.

12-29-2016 - Opinions

27693 - State v. Beaty

The Court affirms appellant's conviction and sentence, but instructs trial judges to refrain from any comments to the jury that may be seen to lessen the State's burden of proof, and holds that henceforth in criminal trials, if the party entitled to the second closing argument requests, the party with the right to open and close must open in full on the law and the facts and must limit its reply to addressing the other party's argument.