Supreme Court of South Carolina

Thu, 2017-04-13 09:30

Alert: As of March 1, there have been reports of the above player failing to load in Google Chrome. If you experience this, please try using either Internet Explorer or the Ancillary video stream linked below. We apologize for any inconvenience and are working towards a resolution that will restore functionality to Google Chrome.

Click here to view the ancillary stream.

Click here to view the video in your local VLC player.

To view archived court cases, visit the Supreme Court Video Portal.

The summary below each case is prepared to offer lawyers and the public a general overview of what issues are included in a case which will be argued. The summary is not a limit on what issues a party to a case may present at oral argument.

Thursday, April 13, 2017

09:30 a.m. (Time Limits: 10-10-5)
2016-000072    The State, Respondent, v. James Allen Johnson, Petitioner.

Assistant Appellate Defender David Alexander, of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General J. Robert Bolchoz, Senior Assistant Attorney General J. Benjamin Aplin, Assistant Attorney General Susannah R. Cole, all of Columbia and Solicitor William W. Wilkins, III, of Greenville, for Respondent.

The Court granted certiorari to review the court of appeals' decision in State v. Johnson, Op. No. 2015-UP-378 (S.C. Ct. App. Filed July 29, 2015).

10:00 a.m. (Time Limits: 15-15-5)
2012-213468    Marion Bowman, Petitioner, v. State of South Carolina, Respondent.

Chief Appellate Defender Robert M. Dudek, Appellate Defender David Alexander and Michael Anzelmo, of Nelson Mullins Riley and Scarborough, LLP, all of Columbia, for Petitioner. Attorney General Alan Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General J. Robert Bolchoz, Deputy Attorney General Donald J. Zelenka and Assistant Attorney General Alphonso Simon, Jr., all of Columbia, for Respondent.

In this post-conviction relief matter, the Court determines whether there is any evidence to support the finding that defense counsel was not ineffective for failing to object to the State's evidence of favorable prison conditions during the penalty phase of Petitioner's capital murder trial.