Ashley v. State, No. 19622

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtLEWIS; MOSS
Citation196 S.E.2d 501,260 S.C. 436
PartiesJohn Marvin ASHLEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of South Carolina, Respondent.
Docket NumberNo. 19622
Decision Date08 May 1973

Page 501

196 S.E.2d 501
260 S.C. 436
John Marvin ASHLEY, Appellant,
v.
The STATE of South Carolina, Respondent.
No. 19622.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
May 8, 1973.

Gerald R. Clay, Abbeville, for appellant.

[260 S.C. 437] Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod, and Asst. Attys. Gen. Emmet H. Clair, and Robert M. Ariail, Columbia, for respondent.

LEWIS, Justice:

Appellant was convicted of reckless homicide. He did not file an appeal but subsequently petitioned for post conviction relief. This petition was denied and he has appealed.

It appears from the Transcript of Record and unchallenged factual statements in respondent's brief that appellant was convicted on May 5, 1971 of reckless homicide and

Page 502

received a sentence of five years. On July 18, 1972 an undated application for post conviction relief, signed by appellant, was filed with the Clerk of Court for Abbeville County and forwarded to respondent. The relief sought was a new trial and, if denied, that appellant be released on bond pending an appeal. Attached to the application was an order of the lower court, dated July 17, 1972, denying the application for post conviction relief, but admitting appellant to bail pending appeal to this Court. Appellant's petition was submitted to the lower court, ex parte, and respondent received no notice of the proceedings prior to the issuance of the order of July 17th. This appeal is from so much of the order of July 17th as denies the application for post conviction relief.

The appeal record consists of the transcript of the trial proceedings, the arrest warrant, indictment, petition for post conviction relief, and the order under appeal.

While the petition of appellant was dismissed by the lower court without an evidentiary hearing, no contention is made [260 S.C. 438] that a hearing should have been held, or that appellant desires to make any further factual showing in support of any allegations of his petition. Neither does he seek to allege any further error in his trial and we therefore assume that he has asserted, with the advice of his retained counsel, all grounds for relief available to him. The appeal is therefore decided on its merits.

The petition of appellant and his exceptions to this Court allege four grounds for relief. These are:

(1) Appellant was not the driver of the car at the time of the collision;

(2) No testimony was presented at the trial to show the cause of the collision or the degree of negligence of the driver of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • Simmons v. State, No. 20001
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 28 Abril 1975
    ...not be construed to permit collateral attack on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction.' Ashley v. State, 260 S.C. 436, 196 S.E.2d 501 Questions II and III complain of matters proper for this Court's consideration upon an appeal. It is uniformly held that an a......
  • Drayton v. Evatt, No. 23852
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 9 Junio 1993
    ...State, 277 S.C. 70, 283 S.E.2d 826 (1981); see also Cummings v. State, 274 S.C. [312 S.C. 9] 26, 260 S.E.2d 187 (1979); Ashley v. State, 260 S.C. 436, 196 S.E.2d 501 (1973); Sellers v. Boone, 261 S.C. 462, 200 S.E.2d 686 (1973). Issues that could have been raised at trial or on direct appea......
  • Brown v. Wise, C. A. 5:21-1890-HMH-KDW
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • 16 Febrero 2022
    ...A post-conviction relief application cannot assert any issues that could have been raised at trial or on direct appeal. Ashley v. State, 260 S.C. 436, 196 S.E.2d 501 (1973). Applicant could have raised this issue at trial or on appeal. His failure to do so has waived this allegation as a gr......
  • Stoudenmire v. Warden, CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:17-2924-RBH-BM
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • 3 Octubre 2018
    ...(S.C. 1975)["It is uniformly held that an application for post-conviction relief is not a substitute for an appeal."]; Ashley v. State, 196 S.E.2d 501, 502 (S.C....
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • Simmons v. State, No. 20001
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 28 Abril 1975
    ...not be construed to permit collateral attack on the ground that the evidence was insufficient to support a conviction.' Ashley v. State, 260 S.C. 436, 196 S.E.2d 501 Questions II and III complain of matters proper for this Court's consideration upon an appeal. It is uniformly held that an a......
  • Drayton v. Evatt, No. 23852
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • 9 Junio 1993
    ...State, 277 S.C. 70, 283 S.E.2d 826 (1981); see also Cummings v. State, 274 S.C. [312 S.C. 9] 26, 260 S.E.2d 187 (1979); Ashley v. State, 260 S.C. 436, 196 S.E.2d 501 (1973); Sellers v. Boone, 261 S.C. 462, 200 S.E.2d 686 (1973). Issues that could have been raised at trial or on direct appea......
  • Brown v. Wise, C. A. 5:21-1890-HMH-KDW
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • 16 Febrero 2022
    ...A post-conviction relief application cannot assert any issues that could have been raised at trial or on direct appeal. Ashley v. State, 260 S.C. 436, 196 S.E.2d 501 (1973). Applicant could have raised this issue at trial or on appeal. His failure to do so has waived this allegation as a gr......
  • Stoudenmire v. Warden, CIVIL ACTION NO. 9:17-2924-RBH-BM
    • United States
    • United States District Courts. 4th Circuit. United States District Court of South Carolina
    • 3 Octubre 2018
    ...(S.C. 1975)["It is uniformly held that an application for post-conviction relief is not a substitute for an appeal."]; Ashley v. State, 196 S.E.2d 501, 502 (S.C....
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT