Horton v. State, 23511

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtFINNEY
Citation306 S.C. 252,411 S.E.2d 223
PartiesBobby HORTON, Petitioner, v. STATE of South Carolina, Respondent.
Docket NumberNo. 23511,23511
Decision Date16 December 1991

Page 223

411 S.E.2d 223
306 S.C. 252
Bobby HORTON, Petitioner,
v.
STATE of South Carolina, Respondent.
No. 23511.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
Submitted Sept. 25, 1991.
Decided Nov. 12, 1991.
Rehearing Denied Dec. 16, 1991.

Asst. Appellate Defender M. Anne Pearce, of the South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, Columbia, for petitioner.

Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen. Donald J. Zelenka and Asst. Atty. Gen., Miller W. Shealy, Jr., Columbia, for respondent.

[306 S.C. 253] FINNEY, Justice:

This Court granted certiorari to review the circuit court's denial of post-conviction relief (PCR) to Petitioner Bobby Horton. After considering the record and reviewing the applicable law, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

The sole issue before this Court is whether petitioner is entitled to PCR on the basis of ineffective assistance of trial counsel.

On September 4, 1986, Michael Peaster (Agent Peaster), an undercover agent with

Page 224

the South Carolina Law Enforcement Division purchased 1.877 grams of cocaine from a man introduced to him as Bobby Horton by Kerry Garner, a confidential informant. The transaction occurred at approximately 10:20 P.M. outside the Spring Hills Club. The petitioner was arrested on February 7, 1987, and later indicted for distribution of cocaine.

The petitioner did not testify at his trial. He was convicted of distribution of cocaine and sentenced to imprisonment for fifteen years and a $10,000 fine; suspended upon service of ten years, payment of the fine, and probation for five years. Petitioner's direct appeal was dismissed, State v. Horton, Memo.Op. No. 89-MO-088 (S.C.Sup.Ct. filed February 21, 1989).

Petitioner filed an application for PCR alleging, inter alia, ineffective assistance of counsel on the grounds that 1) trial counsel gave petitioner erroneous advice on which petitioner based his decision not to testify; and 2) trial counsel failed to object to impermissible testimony. After a hearing, the PCR court issued its order finding that the matters raised a) had been refuted by the record; b) did not indicate any deficiency on the part of trial counsel; or c) were not sufficient to show prejudice to the petitioner. The PCR court dismissed the application with prejudice and remanded the petitioner to the custody of the state.

Petitioner filed a petition for writ of certiorari, and this Court granted certiorari to review only Question 1.

Petitioner maintains his decision not to testify was based on trial counsel's advice that he would be subject to cross examination on two prior criminal convictions. Petitioner's record shows a conviction in 1972 for assault and battery with intent [306 S.C. 254] to kill and a 1980 conviction for simple possession of marijuana. Petitioner contends trial counsel's advice was in error since neither conviction was admissible for the purpose of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
10 practice notes
  • Savoy v. State, 2612
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • July 31, 2014
    ...record, he would have testified in his own defense.”); Jones v. State, 79 Hawai'i 330, 902 P.2d 965, 970 (1995); Horton v. State, 306 S.C. 252, 411 S.E.2d 223, 224 (1991); Everhart v. State, 773 So.2d 78, 79 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2000). 10.Winters v. State, 434 Md. 527, 76 A.3d 986 (2013), does ......
  • Calene v. State, 90-264
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • February 5, 1993
    ...v. DeGeorge, 506 Pa. 445, 485 A.2d 1089 (1984); Com. ex rel. Washington v. Maroney, 427 Pa. 599, 235 A.2d 349 (1967); Horton v. State, 411 S.E.2d 223 (S.C.1991); and State v. Wickline, 184 W.Va. 12, 399 S.E.2d 42 (1990). See also Murray v. State, 776 P.2d 206 (Wyo.1989); Kallas v. State, 77......
  • Tilghman v. State, 856
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1996
    ...then assistance of counsel was ineffective and plea based on that advice could not have been knowing and willing); Horton v. State, 306 S.C. 252, 411 S.E.2d 223 (1991) (accused received ineffective assistance of counsel when his trial counsel informed him that he could [701 A.2d 859] be cro......
  • State v. Joseph, 2711
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • July 17, 1998
    ...the stand, he may be impeached by the introduction into evidence of convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. See, e.g., Horton v. State, 306 S.C. 252, 411 S.E.2d 223 (1991); State v. Major, 301 S.C. 181, 391 S.E.2d 235 (1990). In South Carolina, possession of cocaine is considered a crime......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
10 cases
  • Savoy v. State, 2612
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • July 31, 2014
    ...record, he would have testified in his own defense.”); Jones v. State, 79 Hawai'i 330, 902 P.2d 965, 970 (1995); Horton v. State, 306 S.C. 252, 411 S.E.2d 223, 224 (1991); Everhart v. State, 773 So.2d 78, 79 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.2000). 10.Winters v. State, 434 Md. 527, 76 A.3d 986 (2013), does ......
  • Calene v. State, 90-264
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Wyoming
    • February 5, 1993
    ...v. DeGeorge, 506 Pa. 445, 485 A.2d 1089 (1984); Com. ex rel. Washington v. Maroney, 427 Pa. 599, 235 A.2d 349 (1967); Horton v. State, 411 S.E.2d 223 (S.C.1991); and State v. Wickline, 184 W.Va. 12, 399 S.E.2d 42 (1990). See also Murray v. State, 776 P.2d 206 (Wyo.1989); Kallas v. State, 77......
  • Tilghman v. State, 856
    • United States
    • Court of Special Appeals of Maryland
    • September 1, 1996
    ...then assistance of counsel was ineffective and plea based on that advice could not have been knowing and willing); Horton v. State, 306 S.C. 252, 411 S.E.2d 223 (1991) (accused received ineffective assistance of counsel when his trial counsel informed him that he could [701 A.2d 859] be cro......
  • State v. Joseph, 2711
    • United States
    • Court of Appeals of South Carolina
    • July 17, 1998
    ...the stand, he may be impeached by the introduction into evidence of convictions for crimes of moral turpitude. See, e.g., Horton v. State, 306 S.C. 252, 411 S.E.2d 223 (1991); State v. Major, 301 S.C. 181, 391 S.E.2d 235 (1990). In South Carolina, possession of cocaine is considered a crime......
  • 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