State v. Kierin Marcellus Dennis

Summary

The South Carolina Supreme Court held that a criminal defendant is not entitled to a second immunity hearing under the Protection of Persons and Property Act after a mistrial. The court concluded that the prior immunity ruling was an independent, final proceeding that remained binding despite the mistrial. The court also held that the circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Kierin Marcellus Dennis immunity and remanded the case to the court of appeals to address remaining issues.

Holdings

1. A mistrial does not entitle a criminal defendant to a second immunity hearing under the Protection of Persons and Property Act. An immunity ruling is an independent pretrial proceeding that remains final and binding after a mistrial.
2. The circuit court did not abuse its discretion in denying Dennis immunity because the record contained sufficient evidence to support its finding that Dennis failed to prove the elements of self-defense by a preponderance of the evidence.

Questions Presented

1. Whether a criminal defendant is entitled to a second immunity hearing under the Protection of Persons and Property Act after a mistrial.
2. Whether the circuit court abused its discretion in denying Dennis immunity from prosecution under the Protection of Persons and Property Act.

Disposition

reversed_and_remanded