Summary
The South Carolina Supreme Court held that the appointment of an attorney as guardian ad litem for an incarcerated defendant in a civil forfeiture action required adequate factual consideration and findings. The court reversed and remanded for the trial court to consider indigency, the complexity of the forfeiture action, the effect of incarceration on the defendant’s ability to defend, and whether an attorney appointment and compensation were warranted. The court emphasized that appointment of a guardian ad litem for an incarcerated person is discretionary and not automatic.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether an incarcerated defendant in a civil forfeiture action is automatically entitled to appointment of a guardian ad litem or attorney.
- Whether the circuit court adequately supported its appointment of Pope as guardian ad litem and de facto attorney.
- What factors and procedural requirements govern reconsideration of the appointment of a guardian ad litem or attorney for an incarcerated defendant.
Holdings
- An incarcerated person is not automatically entitled to appointment of a guardian ad litem or attorney. Under Rule 17, SCRCP, and Rule 608, SCACR, the trial court must exercise discretion based on the circumstances of the individual case.
- The appointment order was inadequate because it did not address the factors relevant to appointing Pope as a de facto attorney and guardian ad litem.
- On remand, the trial court must determine whether Pate is indigent, whether the complexity of the civil forfeiture action and Pate's incarceration unfairly hamper his defense, and whether any appointed guardian ad litem or attorney may be compensated from forfeited property proceeds as a proper expense of the proceeding.
Key quotations
“We emphasize neither Rule 17, SCRCP, nor Rule 608, SCACR, require the automatic appointment of GALs for incarcerated persons. Rather, the trial court is to exercise its discretion in making these appointment decisions.” (at 243)
“where an adverse judgment against the prisoner will affect present or future property rights, the court should ensure either that a[GAL] is appointed or that the inmate is at least brought to court prior to entry of a default judgment against him for a determination of whether the appointment of a[GAL] is essential to the protection of the prisoner’s rights.” (at 241)
Factual background
Pate was incarcerated and was a defendant in a civil forfeiture action affecting property rights. The circuit court appointed Pope as Pate's guardian ad litem, and a later order directed Pope to answer and investigate through the guardianship, effectively assigning him the role of both guardian ad litem and attorney. The appointment orders did not discuss the factors relevant to the appointment or address Pate's indigency, the complexity of the forfeiture action, or alternative means of protecting his ability to defend.
Procedural history
The circuit court appointed Pope, a licensed attorney, as guardian ad litem for incarcerated defendant Pate and subsequently clarified that Pope would have sixty days to answer and investigate through the guardianship. Pope sought reconsideration, arguing that the appointment effectively made him both Pate's guardian ad litem and attorney and that the orders lacked factual findings supporting the appointment. The Supreme Court of South Carolina reversed and remanded for reconsideration under Rule 608, SCACR, and the governing rules concerning incarcerated parties and guardians ad litem.
Remand instructions
The circuit court must reconsider the appointment under Rule 608, SCACR, and determine whether Pate is indigent; whether the complexity of the forfeiture action and his incarceration unfairly hamper his defense; and, if a guardian ad litem is appointed, whether the guardian is entitled to compensation from the forfeited property proceeds as a proper expense under S.C. Code Ann. § 44-53-530(c). Ordinarily, the inmate should be brought before the court before the appointment decision. If no guardian ad litem is appointed, arrangements must ensure the inmate's presence at trial.