Martinez v. State, 23353
| Decision Date | 25 February 1991 |
| Docket Number | No. 23353,23353 |
| Citation | 304 S.C. 39,403 S.E.2d 113 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Laville MARTINEZ, Petitioner, v. STATE of South Carolina, Respondent. |
Asst. Appellate Defenders Franklin W. Draper and Stephen P. Williams, both of S.C. Office of Appellate Defense, Columbia, for petitioner.
Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Chief Deputy Atty. Gen. Donald J. Zelenka, and Asst. Atty. Gen. Frank L. Valenta, Jr., Columbia, for respondent.
Petitioner, Laville Martinez (Martinez), was convicted of first degree burglary and first degree criminal sexual conduct. His direct appeal was affirmed. State v. Martinez, 294 S.C. 72, 362 S.E.2d 641 (1987). We granted certiorari to review the denial of his application for post-conviction relief (PCR).
We reverse and remand for a new trial.
On March 7, 1986, Allison Counts (Victim) was awakened in her bed by an unidentified black male. She was raped at knifepoint, then dragged into her kitchen, where the attacker dropped something on the floor. When he left, Victim dressed and went to her sister's house, arriving between 2:00 to 2:15 a.m.
When Victim returned to the apartment with police, a wallet containing Martinez' driver's license was found on the kitchen floor. Martinez was arrested the next day.
At trial, Martinez testified: that he went to a lounge approximately three blocks from Victim's home, at 9:00 p.m. on March 6, 1986; that between 12:00 and 1:00 a.m., he advised the manager of the lounge, Darnell Kelly, that he had misplaced his wallet; that, unable to find it, he left the lounge at 1:45 a.m., arriving home precisely at 2:00 a.m. The manager, Kelly, verified that Martinez did, between 12:00 and 1:00 a.m., report the missing wallet.
Prior to trial, Martinez advised counsel that a friend named Tony Wilson had seen him leaving the lounge at exactly 1:45 a.m. Counsel did not, however, subpoena Wilson as a witness.
At PCR, Counsel testified that he would have called Wilson had he been present in the Courtroom on the day of trial. He conceded that Wilson's testimony, placing Martinez at the lounge fifteen minutes prior to the conclusion of the rape, may have been important. Further, he candidly admitted he was uncertain whether "one more piece of evidence" may have made a difference in the verdict.
The sole issue we address is whether Counsel was ineffective in failing to subpoena Wilson as a witness.
To establish a claim of ineffective assistance of counsel, the defendant must show that (1) counsel's representation fell below an objective standard of reasonableness, and (2) that, but for counsel's errors,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Putnam v. State
...he saw the petitioner at a location other than the crime scene fifteen minutes before the conclusion of the crime. 304 S.C. 39, 40–41, 403 S.E.2d 113, 113–14 (1991). In Martinez, trial counsel testified at the PCR hearing that he would have called the witness if the witness had been present......
-
Glover v. State, 24260
...to the rule that counsel's speculative testimony is a sufficient basis upon which to affirm the grant of PCR. See Martinez v. State, 304 S.C. 39, 403 S.E.2d 113 (1991) (counsel's concession that potential alibi witnesses alleged testimony "may have made a difference" supports grant of PCR).......
-
Thornes v. State
...of his options based on the evidence available at the time. At first blush, this case appears indistinguishable from Martinez v. State, 304 S.C. 39, 403 S.E.2d 113 (1991). A deeper inquiry into the facts reveals a much different story. In Martinez, a defense witness was not subpoenaed to te......
-
Gantt v. State
...the outcome of the trial would not have been different. Counsel's admission is unlike the testimony of counsel in Martinez v. State, 304 S.C. 39, 403 S.E.2d 113 (1991), where trial counsel admitted the testimony of a potential witness could have made a 3. For example, blood alcohol level is......