Picklesimer v. State, 19099
| Decision Date | 02 September 1970 |
| Docket Number | No. 19099,19099 |
| Citation | 176 S.E.2d 536,254 S.C. 596 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | J. D. PICKLESIMER, Respondent, v. STATE of South Carolina et al., Appellants. |
Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod and Asst. Attys. Gen. Emmet H. Clair and John P. Wilson, Columbia, for appellants.
Edward A. Harter, Frank B. Register, Jr., Columbia, for respondent.
The petitioner, J. D. Picklesimer, is a prisoner at the South Carolina Department of Corrections. He asked the circuit court to construe and declare the effect of three sentences imposed upon him. It was his contention that the administrative authorities at the Department of Corrections erroneously interpreted the sentences.
The circuit judge, after a hearing was held, correctly ruled:
From such ruling no appeal was taken.
During the course of the hearing the question of respondent's eligibility date to be considered for parole was raised. The circuit judge ruled:
It is from this last ruling that the State has appealed. It is the contention of the State that a prisoner must serve one-third of the total aggregated sentence before application for parole may be made. Under the statute a prisoner may apply for parole after he has served one-third of his time. The question we are called upon to answer is whether he may apply after he has served one-third of the active sentence imposed and to be served in prison (11 years and 34 days), or after one-third of the total sentence imposed, including the suspended portion (20 years and 34 days). Relevant portions of the parole statute formerly existing and now in effect are as follows:
The original Act, Section 55--611, reads in part as follows:
'In all cases cognizable under this chapter the Probation, Parole and Pardon Board may, upon ten days' written notice to the solicitor and judge who participated in the trial of any prisoner, parole such prisoner convicted of a felony and imprisoned in the State Penitentiary, in any jail or upon the public works of any county:
'(1) Who, if sentenced for not more than thirty years, shall have served at least one third of the term for which he was sentenced.'
In 1962 the General Assembly amended Section 55--611(1) to read as follows:
'(1) Who, if sentenced for not more than thirty years, shall have served at least one third of the term for which he was sentenced to serve.' Act No. 766 of the Acts and Joint Resolutions of 1962, p. 1887.
The effect of the amendment was to add the words 'to serve' at the end of item 1.
In 1963 the General Assembly amended ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ridenour v. State
...home. The sentence is the total of the part served at the prison and at home." Id. at 253, 447 A.2d 892 (quoting Picklesimer v. State, 254 S.C. 596, 176 S.E.2d 536, 538 (1970)). To be sure, section 641A(a)(3) and the excerpt from Hanson v. Hughes quoted above make plain that a split sentenc......
-
Davis v. South Carolina Dept. of Public Safety
...cases cited therein is misplaced. Based in part on the cases State v. Germany, 216 S.C. 182, 57 S.E.2d 165 (1949); Picklesimer v. State, 254 S.C. 596, 176 S.E.2d 536 (1970); and Mims v. State, 273 S.C. 740, 259 S.E.2d 602 (1979), the Attorney General's Office advised Department that "there ......
-
Hanson v. Hughes
...sentence; it may then suspend execution of a part of it. The effect of such a partial suspension is as stated in Picklesimer v. State, 254 S.C. 596, 176 S.E.2d 536, 538 (1970)--that: "When a portion of a sentence is suspended it merely means that a person is permitted to serve a portion of ......
-
Mims v. State
...be considered as a single 'sentence.' " Polk v. Manning, 224 S.C. 467, 472-73, 79 S.E.2d 875, 877 (1954). In Picklesimer v. State, 254 S.C. 596, 176 S.E.2d 536 (1970) the Court held that suspended portions of an imposed sentence should be included for purposes of computing parole eligibilit......