From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fossick v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 30, 1995
453 S.E.2d 899 (S.C. 1995)

Opinion

24188

Submitted November 16, 1994

Decided January 30, 1995 Rehearing Denied February 23, 1995

Appeal from Civil Court, Richland County, Costa M. Pelicones, J.

M. Anne Pearce, Asst. Appellate Defender, of S.C. Office of Appellant Defense, Columbia, for petitioner. T. Travis Medlock, Atty. Gen. Donald J. Zelenka, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen., and Salley W. Elliott, Deputy Atty. Gen., Columbia, for respondent.


Petitioner claims the Post Conviction Relief judge erred in failing to grant Post Conviction Relief because trial counsel did not object to the trial judge's charge on reasonable doubt. We disagree. Affirmed pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 220(b) and the following authority: State v. Johnson, 306 S.C. 119, 410 S.E.2d 547 (1991), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 112 S.Ct. 1691, 118 L.Ed.2d 404 (1992) (a reasonable doubt instruction which merely uses the term "substantial doubt," without any reference to "moral certainty" or "grave uncertainty," is not reversible error).

Next, Petitioner claims the Post Conviction Relief judge erred in failing to grant Post Conviction Relief when trial counsel did not object to solicitor's closing argument that the Petitioner showed no remorse. We agree and reverse the circuit court order denying Petitioner's Post Conviction Relief pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 220(b) and the following authorities: State v. Johnson, 293 S.C. 321, 360 S.E.2d 317 (1987) ("No right is more fundamental than the right of an accused to plead not guilty . . . . Comments by the prosecution upon an accused's failure to express remorse invite the jury to draw an adverse inference merely because the defendant did not appear penitent."); Thompson v. Aiken, 281 S.C. 239, 315 S.E.2d 110 (1984) (counsel ineffective for failing to object to improper closing statements by solicitor); Simmons v. State, 308 S.C. 481 419 S.E.2d 225 (1992) (petitioner prejudiced "to the extent that there exists a probability that counsel's deficient performance affected the outcome of petitioner's trial.").


Summaries of

Fossick v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 30, 1995
453 S.E.2d 899 (S.C. 1995)
Case details for

Fossick v. State

Case Details

Full title:James Donald Fossick, Petitioner v. State of South Carolina, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Jan 30, 1995

Citations

453 S.E.2d 899 (S.C. 1995)
453 S.E.2d 899

Citing Cases

State v. Passmore

Having written to the point of expiation, we come to the ineluctable conclusion that we are constrained by…

State v. Fossick

MOORE, Justice: Appellant was convicted in 1986 for the murder of Marilee Whitten. This Court affirmed by…