Simmons v. State, 24119
| Decision Date | 10 August 1994 |
| Docket Number | No. 24119,24119 |
| Citation | 446 S.E.2d 436,316 S.C. 28 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Ivery SIMMONS, Respondent, v. STATE of South Carolina, Petitioner. |
Atty. Gen., T. Travis Medlock, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen. Joseph D. Shine, Asst. Atty. Gen., Delbert H. Singleton, Jr., Columbia, for petitioner.
Asst. Appellate Defender Wanda H. Haile, of S.C. Office of Appellate Defense, Columbia, for respondent.
We granted certiorari to review the granting of Ivery Simmons's application for Post-Conviction Relief (PCR). We reverse.
Simmons applied for PCR arguing, among other things, that he was wrongly denied work release and his due process rights were violated. Simmons proposed three methods by which he could be granted relief on this allegation. The PCR judge granted one of the remedies, reconsideration of Simmons's application for work release.
The State sought certiorari arguing that: 1) the PCR judge lacked jurisdiction to entertain a claim of wrongful denial of work release because it is not proper matter for PCR, and 2) Simmons is not entitled to have his denial of work release reconsidered.
The State argues work release is a condition of confinement and that conditions of lawful imprisonment previously have been held by this Court to be an inappropriate claim for PCR. Tutt v. State, 277 S.C. 525, 290 S.E.2d 414 (1982).
However, conditions of imprisonment have been considered on a discretionary basis in PCR proceedings and by this Court. See Harris v. State, --- S.C. ----, 424 S.E.2d 509 (1992) (). Accordingly, we find the PCR judge properly exercised his discretionary jurisdiction in this matter.
Next, the State contends that Simmons does not meet the criteria for work release and is not entitled to reconsideration of the denial of his application. We agree.
South Carolina Department of Corrections (SCDC) Policy 2300.1 provides in pertinent part as follows:
b. Custody Classification/Detainers: The inmate must ... not have any "Wanteds" for major offenses pending on his/her case.
d. Prior Facility Records and Community Offenses: ... If the record and offenses reflect that of an habitual offender, the application will not be given favorable consideration. If an inmate has been committed on more than four occasions in ... which the sentenced time given was more than ninety (90) days, he/she will be ineligible for consideration. Inmates with...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Al-Shabazz v. State
...State, supra, the Court occasionally has allowed inmates to raise conditions of imprisonment in a PCR proceeding. See Simmons v. State, 316 S.C. 28, 446 S.E.2d 436 (1994) (stating "conditions of imprisonment have been considered on a discretionary basis in PCR proceedings and by this Court,......
-
The untouchables: the impact of South Carolina's new judicial selection system on the South Carolina Supreme Court, 1997-2003.
...defendant in this case was not entitled to work credits because no law at the time of his offense allowed for them); Simmons v. State, 446 S.E.2d 436, 436-37 (S.C. 1994) (holding that a PCR judge had jurisdiction to decide a claim of wrongful denial of work (95) Al-Shabazz, 527 S.E.2d at 74......