McClary v. State
| Decision Date | 19 November 1985 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | Marion Joey McCLARY, Petitioner, v. The STATE, Respondent. |
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on a petition for a writ of certiorari after the denial of McClary's petition for post-conviction relief. The petition is denied.
We take this opportunity to clarify our holding in State v. Woods, 282 S.C. 18, 316 S.E.2d 673 (1984). In Woods, we held that our decision in State v. Elmore, 279 S.C. 417, 308 S.E.2d 781 (1983), would be applied retroactively. Adopting the reasoning of Shea v. Louisiana, 470 U.S. ----, 105 S.Ct. 1065, 84 L.Ed.2d 38 (1985), we now hold that Elmore 's retroactive effect will be limited to cases pending on direct appeal and will not apply to collateral attacks on criminal convictions.
FINNEY, J., not participating.
To continue reading
Request your trial
4 cases
-
Yates v. Aiken, 22614
... ... This Court affirmed the conviction and sentence. State v. Yates, 280 S.C. 29, 310 S.E.2d 805 (1982), cert. den., 462 U.S. 1124, 103 S.Ct. 3098, 77 L.Ed.2d 1356 (1983). Yates' application for post ... McClary v. State, 287 S.C. 160, 337 S.E.2d 218 (1985). In light of the remand of this case, however, we take this opportunity to re-evaluate and expand on ... ...
-
Yates v. Aiken
...to cases pending on direct appeal at the time Elmore was decided and does not apply to collateral attacks. See McClary v. State, 287 S.C. 160, 337 S.E.2d 218 (1985).3 We note that under this analysis petitioner would not be eligible in federal habeas corpus proceedings to raise the mandator......
- Lyles v. Quantum Chemical Co. (Emery)
-
Truesdale v. Aiken
...U.S. 51, 105 S.Ct. 1065, 84 L.Ed.2d 38 (1985); Solem v. Stumes, 465 U.S. 638, 104 S.Ct. 1338, 79 L.Ed.2d 579 (1984); McClary v. State, 287 S.C. 160, 337 S.E.2d 218 (1985). The petition for rehearing is therefore IT IS SO ORDERED. ...