Jackson v. State, No. 24657

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
Writing for the CourtBURNETT; FINNEY
Citation489 S.E.2d 915,331 S.C. 486
Docket NumberNo. 24657
Decision Date04 September 1997
PartiesKurtis Christopher JACKSON, Petitioner, v. The STATE of South Carolina, Respondent.

Page 915

489 S.E.2d 915
331 S.C. 486
Kurtis Christopher JACKSON, Petitioner,
v.
The STATE of South Carolina, Respondent.
No. 24657.
Supreme Court of South Carolina.
Submitted Feb. 20, 1997.
Decided July 28, 1997.
Rehearing Denied Sept. 4, 1997.

Assistant Appellate Defender Lesley M. Coggiola, of South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, Columbia, for petitioner.

Attorney General Charles Molony Condon, Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Teresa Nesbitt Cosby and Assistant Attorney General Allen Bullard, Columbia, for respondent.

BURNETT, Justice:

This Court granted a writ of certiorari to review the dismissal of petitioner's post-conviction relief (PCR) application. The PCR judge determined petitioner lacked standing

Page 916

because he had never been incarcerated. We reverse and remand.
FACTS

Petitioner was arrested in June 1991 for possession of marijuana. He was released on a personal recognizance bond. Petitioner was convicted and ordered to pay a fine or serve thirty days in jail. Petitioner paid the fine. He did not appeal his conviction or sentence.

Petitioner filed an application for post-conviction relief (PCR) in 1995, alleging he is entitled to appeal his conviction because the magistrate had informed him that he could not appeal and his due process rights were violated by the unfair trial. Further, petitioner alleged he is prejudiced by persistent effects of his conviction. After a hearing, the PCR judge granted respondent's motion to dismiss. The PCR judge found petitioner lacked standing to pursue his claim under South Carolina's Uniform Post-Conviction Procedure Act, S.C.Code Ann. §§ 17-27-10 to 17-27-120 (1976 & Supp.1996) (Act), because petitioner was not "in custody" and never served a prison sentence for his conviction.

ISSUE

Did the lower court err in dismissing petitioner's application for PCR on the ground that petitioner had no standing to bring the action where the challenged conviction did not result in incarceration and where petitioner alleges he is suffering continuing effects from his conviction?

DISCUSSION

Petitioner claims the PCR judge erred in dismissing his application for lack of standing because petitioner was not "in custody." We agree.

Under S.C.Code Ann. § 17-27-20(a), "[a]ny person who has been convicted of, or sentenced for, a crime ..." may institute a PCR proceeding. The Act does not contain an express "in custody" requirement. Further, the Act does not expressly require the applicant to receive a sentence of imprisonment before bringing a PCR action.

Instead, the Act allows a person who has been convicted of or sentenced for a crime to file an action. Convict means "to prove a person guilty of a crime." Webster's New World Dictionary 311 (2d College ed. 1976). A sentence is defined as "the judgment formally pronounced by the court or judge upon the defendant after his conviction in a criminal prosecution, imposing the punishment to be inflicted." Black's Law Dictionary 1222 (5th ed. 1979). A sentence is not limited to a term of imprisonment; instead, it may be either a...

To continue reading

Request your trial
18 practice notes
  • Abbeville Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. State, No. 27466.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • November 12, 2014
    ...court will not rule on moot and academic questions or make adjudication where there remains no actual controversy. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 490 n. 2, 489 S.E.2d 915, 917 n. 2 (1997). “A case becomes moot when judgment, if rendered, will have no practical legal effect upon [the] exist......
  • Al-Shabazz v. State, No. 24995.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • August 23, 1999
    ...to apply for PCR if he is in custody or if the results of his conviction still persist after release from custody. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 489 S.E.2d 915 (1997); Jones v. State, 322 S.C. 101, 470 S.E.2d 110 3. See S.C.Code Ann. § 24-13-210 (Supp.1999) (good-time credits); S.C.Code A......
  • Wilson v. Dallas, No. 27227.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 8, 2013
    ...468 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1996). Justiciability encompasses several doctrines, including ripeness, mootness, and standing. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 491 n. 2, 489 S.E.2d 915, 917 n. 2 (1997) (citation omitted). “Standing refers to a party's right to make a legal claim or seek judicial enfo......
  • Wilson v. Dallas, Appellate Case No. 2009-142286
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • February 27, 2013
    ...468 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1996). Justiciability encompasses several doctrines, including ripeness, mootness, and standing. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 491 n.2, 489 S.E.2d 915, 917 n.2 (1997) (citation omitted). "Standing refers to a party's right to make a legal claim or seek judicial e......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
18 cases
  • Abbeville Cnty. Sch. Dist. v. State, No. 27466.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • November 12, 2014
    ...court will not rule on moot and academic questions or make adjudication where there remains no actual controversy. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 490 n. 2, 489 S.E.2d 915, 917 n. 2 (1997). “A case becomes moot when judgment, if rendered, will have no practical legal effect upon [the] exist......
  • Al-Shabazz v. State, No. 24995.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • August 23, 1999
    ...to apply for PCR if he is in custody or if the results of his conviction still persist after release from custody. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 489 S.E.2d 915 (1997); Jones v. State, 322 S.C. 101, 470 S.E.2d 110 3. See S.C.Code Ann. § 24-13-210 (Supp.1999) (good-time credits); S.C.Code A......
  • Wilson v. Dallas, No. 27227.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • May 8, 2013
    ...468 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1996). Justiciability encompasses several doctrines, including ripeness, mootness, and standing. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 491 n. 2, 489 S.E.2d 915, 917 n. 2 (1997) (citation omitted). “Standing refers to a party's right to make a legal claim or seek judicial enfo......
  • Wilson v. Dallas, Appellate Case No. 2009-142286
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
    • February 27, 2013
    ...468 S.E.2d 861, 864 (1996). Justiciability encompasses several doctrines, including ripeness, mootness, and standing. Jackson v. State, 331 S.C. 486, 491 n.2, 489 S.E.2d 915, 917 n.2 (1997) (citation omitted). "Standing refers to a party's right to make a legal claim or seek judicial enforc......
  • 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