Summary
The South Carolina Court of Appeals dismissed Ryan Lenard Manigo's appeal as arising from an interlocutory order that was not immediately appealable. The court held that Manigo, a pretrial detainee, could not demonstrate cognizable prejudice before trial, conviction, or sentencing, and noted that issues concerning publicity and admissibility could be addressed through later proceedings.
Holdings
- The order was an interlocutory order that was not immediately appealable under South Carolina law because it did not constitute a final judgment and did not fall within an exception in section 14-3-330.
- The court declined to reach the merits of the remaining arguments because dismissal of the appeal on appealability grounds was dispositive.
Questions Presented
- Whether the circuit court's order permitting release of Manigo's pretrial telephone calls was a final or otherwise immediately appealable order.
- Whether the appeal should be dismissed as premature because Manigo had not yet been tried, convicted, or sentenced.
Disposition
dismissed
Cases Cited (16)
- State v. Hubbard, 277 S.C. 568, 290 S.E.2d 817 (1982)(followed)
- State v. Miller, 289 S.C. 426, 346 S.E.2d 705 (1986)(followed)
- Brown v. Se. Servs., H.H.I., LLC, 446 S.C. 105, 917 S.E.2d 925 (Ct. App. 2025)(followed)
- Ex parte Wilson, 367 S.C. 7, 625 S.E.2d 205 (2005)(followed)
- State v. Wilson, 387 S.C. 597, 693 S.E.2d 923 (2010)(followed)
- State v. Looper, 421 S.C. 384, 807 S.E.2d 203 (2017)(followed)
- State v. Hill, 314 S.C. 330, 444 S.E.2d 255 (1994)(followed)
- In re Lorenzo B., 307 S.C. 439, 415 S.E.2d 795 (1992)(followed)
- Parsons v. State, 289 S.C. 542, 347 S.E.2d 504 (1986)(followed)
- State v. Washington, 285 S.C. 457, 330 S.E.2d 289 (1985)(followed)
Showing top 10 of 16.
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…