Summary
The Supreme Court of South Carolina affirmed the denial of post-conviction relief to Leroy E. Glaze, holding that counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the use of his uncounseled New Jersey marijuana conviction as a sentence enhancer. The court concluded that a time-served sentence following pretrial detention did not constitute imprisonment resulting from the uncounseled misdemeanor conviction under Scott v. Illinois, and therefore the conviction could constitutionally be used under Nichols v. United States.
Holdings
- An uncounseled misdemeanor conviction does not violate the right to counsel when the defendant's time-served sentence does not result from confinement imposed as a consequence of the conviction; pretrial detention caused by inability to post bail is not confinement resulting from the uncounseled conviction.
- The New Jersey marijuana conviction was constitutionally valid under Scott and could be used to enhance Glaze's South Carolina sentence under Nichols v. United States.
- Glaze did not establish ineffective assistance of counsel because counsel had no valid basis to object to use of the New Jersey conviction as a sentence enhancer.
Questions Presented
- Whether an indigent defendant convicted of a misdemeanor without counsel, who receives a sentence of time served after spending pretrial time in jail because of inability to post bail, was denied the constitutional right to counsel.
- Whether the New Jersey marijuana conviction could constitutionally be used to enhance Glaze's South Carolina sentence.
- Whether trial counsel was ineffective for failing to object to Glaze's sentencing as a three-time offender.
Disposition
affirmed
Cases Cited (9)
- Patterson v. State, 359 S.C. 115, 117, 597 S.E.2d 150, 151 (2004)(followed)
- Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 104 S. Ct. 2052, 80 L. Ed. 2d 674 (1984)(followed)
- Hall v. Catoe, 360 S.C. 353, 359, 601 S.E.2d 335, 338 (2004)(followed)
- Argersinger v. Hamlin, 407 U.S. 25, 37, 92 S. Ct. 2006, 2012, 32 L. Ed. 2d 530, 538 (1972)(followed)
- Scott v. Illinois, 440 U.S. 367, 373-74, 99 S. Ct. 1158, 1162, 59 L. Ed. 2d 383, 389 (1979)(followed)
- Nichols v. United States, 511 U.S. 738, 748-49, 114 S. Ct. 1921, 1928, 128 L. Ed. 2d 745, 755 (1994)(followed)
- Nicholson v. State, 761 So. 2d 924, 930-31 (Miss. Ct. App. 2000)(persuasive comparison)
- State v. O'Neill, 140 Ohio App. 3d 48, 746 N.E.2d 654 (7th Dist. 2000)(discussed)
- Gideon v. Wainwright, Gideon v. Wainwright, 372 U.S. 335, 83 S. Ct. 792, 9 L. Ed. 2d 799 (1963)(cited)
Cited In (0)
No citing cases on record yet.
Court Document
Open PDFLoading document…