Copeland v. Manning, No. 17544

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtOXNER; Lewis; STUKES
Citation109 S.E.2d 361,234 S.C. 510
PartiesFrank COPELAND, Appellant, v. W. M. MANNING, Warden, et al., Respondents.
Decision Date10 June 1959
Docket NumberNo. 17544

Page 361

109 S.E.2d 361
234 S.C. 510
Frank COPELAND, Appellant,
v.
W. M. MANNING, Warden, et al., Respondents.
No. 17544.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
June 10, 1959.

[234 S.C. 511] Frank Copeland, pro. per.

[234 S.C. 512] James S. Verner, Asst. Atty. Gen., William T. Jones, Sol., Greenwood, for respondent.

OXNER, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of Judge Griffith denying a petition by appellant for a writ of habeas corpus.

At the February, 1954, term of the Court of General Sessions of Laurens County, appellant and one James Dean were jointly indicted in separate counts for (1) breaking and entering a store with intent to commit larceny, and (2) grand larceny. At the same term of court appellant alone was indicted, in separate counts in the same indictment, for (1) breaking and entering another store with intent to commit larceny, and (2) grand larceny. The offenses charged in the first indictment were committed on December 15, 1953 and those named in the second indictment two days later. Both Dean and appellant pleaded guilty. On the first indictment appellant was sentenced by Judge Lewis, the presiding Judge, to imprisonment for a term of 12 years and his codefendant Dean for a term of 5 years. On the second indictment appellant was sentenced to imprisonment by

Page 362

Judge Lewis for a term of 12 years, to run concurrently with that [234 S.C. 513] imposed on the first indictment. Appellant forthwith entered upon the service of the foregoing sentences. In 1957 he escaped but was recaptured.

In May, 1958, appellant filed with Judge Griffith a petition for a writ of habeas corpus and sought to be discharged upon the grounds (1) that the two charges in each indictment under which he was sentenced in fact constituted only one offense and that the sentence imposed was in excess of that permitted by law, and (2) that even if each indictment be regarded as charging two separate offenses, it was error to impose a sentence in gross exceeding that which could have been validly given upon any one count. In an order filed on May 17, 1958, Judge Griffith, after pointing out that appellant could have been given a sentence up to 15 years on each indictment--5 years on the first count and 10 years on the second count, said he thought Judge Lewis 'intended to impose a sentence of 12 years, part of which would be on the housebreaking charge and part on the grand larceny charge, without specifying what portion he intended should apply to these offenses.' He then stated that out of an abundance of caution he 'was going to hold, as the petitioner claims, that the sentences on these indictments are void and that the defendant will have to be resentenced.' Accordingly, he declared the sentences imposed by Judge Lewis void and directed that appellant be transferred to the Laurens County jail to be resentenced during the June, 1958, term of court.

Pursuant to the terms of the foregoing order, appellant was brought before Judge Griffith, the presiding Judge, at the June, 1958, term of the Court of General Sessions for Laurens County, and resentenced. Judge Griffith imposed a sentence of six years on each indictment, to run consecutively, and directed that appellant be given credit for the time served under the sentences which had been declared a void.

At the September, 1958, term of the Court of General Sessions for Laurens County, appellant pleaded guilty to an [234 S.C. 514] indictment charging him with escaping from custody in 1957. Judge Bussey, the presiding Judge, imposed a sentence of 15 months to commence after the service of the two 6 year sentences imposed by Judge Griffith.

In November, 1958, appellant filed a second petition for a writ of habeas corpus in which he attacked the validity of the sentences imposed by Judge Griffith upon substantially the same grounds as those used in the attack upon the validity...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • People v. McFarland, Cr. 7138
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • November 20, 1962
    ...12 Wyatt v. Alvis (1955, Ohio App.) 136 N.E.2d 726, 727; cf. Breese v. State (1861) 12 Ohio St. 146, 152. 13 Copeland v. Manning (1959), 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361, 14 Robinson v. Commonwealth (1949), 190 Va. 134, 56 S.E.2d 367, 370(3) (dictum); cf. Speers v. Commonwealth (1867, Va.) 17 G......
  • Mead v. State, Nos. 1225
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alaska (US)
    • October 15, 1971
    ...Briggen, 112 Or. 681, 231 P. 125 (1924); Commonwealth ex rel. Moszczynski v. Ashe, 343 Pa. 102, 21 A.2d 920 (1941); Copeland v. Manning, 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361 (1959); Johnson v. State, 126 Tex.Cr.R. 466, 72 S.W.2d 288 (1934); State v. Jones, 13 Utah 2d 35, 368 P.2d 262 (1962); Robins......
  • People v. Wise, Docket No. 69725
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • July 12, 1984
    ...1 Ohio St.2d 85, 204 N.E.2d 232 (1965); Commonwealth ex rel. Moszczynski v. Ashe, 343 Pa. 102, 21 A.2d 920 (1941); Copeland v. Manning, 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361 (1959); State v. Davis, 613 S.W.2d 218 (Tenn.1981); Johnson v. State, 126 Tex.Cr. 466, 72 S.W.2d 288 (1934); State v. Jones, 1......
  • State v. Parker, No. 3290.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • January 29, 2001
    ...Ballew v. State, 262 S.C. 393, 204 S.E.2d 736 (1974) (characterizing grand larceny as a common law offense); Copeland v. Manning, 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361 (1959) (recognizing common law grand larceny as separate and distinct from the statutory offense of breaking and entering with inten......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • People v. McFarland, Cr. 7138
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (California)
    • November 20, 1962
    ...12 Wyatt v. Alvis (1955, Ohio App.) 136 N.E.2d 726, 727; cf. Breese v. State (1861) 12 Ohio St. 146, 152. 13 Copeland v. Manning (1959), 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361, 14 Robinson v. Commonwealth (1949), 190 Va. 134, 56 S.E.2d 367, 370(3) (dictum); cf. Speers v. Commonwealth (1867, Va.) 17 G......
  • Mead v. State, Nos. 1225
    • United States
    • Supreme Court of Alaska (US)
    • October 15, 1971
    ...Briggen, 112 Or. 681, 231 P. 125 (1924); Commonwealth ex rel. Moszczynski v. Ashe, 343 Pa. 102, 21 A.2d 920 (1941); Copeland v. Manning, 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361 (1959); Johnson v. State, 126 Tex.Cr.R. 466, 72 S.W.2d 288 (1934); State v. Jones, 13 Utah 2d 35, 368 P.2d 262 (1962); Robins......
  • People v. Wise, Docket No. 69725
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Michigan (US)
    • July 12, 1984
    ...1 Ohio St.2d 85, 204 N.E.2d 232 (1965); Commonwealth ex rel. Moszczynski v. Ashe, 343 Pa. 102, 21 A.2d 920 (1941); Copeland v. Manning, 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361 (1959); State v. Davis, 613 S.W.2d 218 (Tenn.1981); Johnson v. State, 126 Tex.Cr. 466, 72 S.W.2d 288 (1934); State v. Jones, 1......
  • State v. Parker, No. 3290.
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • January 29, 2001
    ...Ballew v. State, 262 S.C. 393, 204 S.E.2d 736 (1974) (characterizing grand larceny as a common law offense); Copeland v. Manning, 234 S.C. 510, 109 S.E.2d 361 (1959) (recognizing common law grand larceny as separate and distinct from the statutory offense of breaking and entering with inten......
  • 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