State v. Dasher, 21824

Citation298 S.E.2d 215,278 S.C. 454
Decision Date08 December 1982
Docket NumberNo. 21824,21824
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of South Carolina
PartiesThe STATE, Appellant, v. Leon J. DASHER and Robert Gene Holbrook, Respondents.

Atty. Gen. Daniel R. McLeod, Asst. Atty. Gen. Harold M. Coombs, Jr., and Sr. Asst. Atty. Gen. Brian P. Gibbes, Columbia, and Sol. Donald V. Myers, Lexington, for appellant.

L. Marion Gressette and F. Lee Prickett, Jr., St. Matthews, and Henry W. Kirkland, Columbia, for respondents.

GREGORY, Justice:

The trial judge dismissed an indictment charging respondents with conspiring to transport, store, and distribute controlled substances in South Carolina. The State appeals. We affirm.

On November 20, 1978, the State returned two indictments charging respondents with conspiring to transport, store, and distribute controlled substances in South Carolina.

Conspiracy is defined in S.C.Code Ann. § 16-17-410 (1976) as "a combination between two or more persons for the purpose of accomplishing a criminal or unlawful object or an object neither criminal nor unlawful by criminal or unlawful means." Hence, the gravamen of the offense of conspiracy is the agreement or combination.

The conspiracy alleging overt acts involving cocaine was tried in December 1978. Respondents were found guilty by a jury. Dasher's motion for judgment of acquittal notwithstanding the verdict was granted by the trial judge. We reversed, reinstated the verdict of the jury, and remanded the case for sentencing in State v. Dasher, S.C.1982, 297 S.E.2d 414.

When the indictment for conspiracy alleging overt acts involving marijuana was called for trial, respondents moved to quash the indictment on the ground of former jeopardy. This motion was granted.

The theory of former jeopardy consists of three constitutional safeguards: (1) protection from prosecution for the same offense after acquittal; (2) protection from prosecution for the same offense after conviction; and (3) protection from multiple prosecutions for the same offense after an improvidently granted mistrial. State v. Kirby, 269 S.C. 25, 236 S.E.2d 33 (1977).

The State argues former jeopardy does not apply because the indictments represent two separate and distinct offenses which require separate proof for conviction. Respondents argue former jeopardy does apply because both indictments charge common individuals with conspiring to violate the Controlled Substances Act during overlapping periods of time.

A distinction must be made between separate conspiracies, where certain parties are common to all the conspiracies, but with no overall goal or common purpose, and one overall continuing conspiracy with various parties joining and terminating their relationship at different times.... In essence, the question is what is the nature of the agreement. If there is one overall agreement among the various parties to perform different functions in order to carry out the objectives of the conspiracy, the agreement among all the parties constitutes a single conspiracy.

16 Am.Jur.2d, Conspiracy § 11 (1979).

"[S]eparate elements of time, persons, places, offenses,...

To continue reading

Request your trial
14 cases
  • State v. Crawford
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • January 31, 2005
    ...contemplated by the conspiracy...." Id. The gravamen of the offense of conspiracy is the agreement, or combination. State v. Dasher, 278 S.C. 454, 298 S.E.2d 215 (1982); see also State v. Buckmon, 347 S.C. 316, 323, 555 S.E.2d 402, 405 (2001) ("The essence of a conspiracy is the agreement."......
  • State v. Barroso
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • March 10, 1995
    ...by the Double Jeopardy Clause pursuant to Grady v. Corbin, 495 U.S. 508, 110 S.Ct. 2084, 109 L.Ed.2d 548 (1990) and State v. Dasher, 278 S.C. 454, 298 S.E.2d 215 (1982). The case at hand is very similar to the 1993 case of State v. Wilson, 311 S.C. 382, 429 S.E.2d 453 (1993) wherein our Sup......
  • State v. Gunn
    • United States
    • South Carolina Supreme Court
    • March 11, 1993
    ...the evidence showed a number of conspiracies. Compare State v. Amerson, --- S.C. ----, 428 S.E.2d 871 (1993); and State v. Dasher, 278 S.C. 454, 298 S.E.2d 215 (1982). The State's theory placed Lee Gunn at the "hub" of the alleged conspiracy. In the State's opening argument, the Assistant A......
  • State v. Condrey, 3471.
    • United States
    • South Carolina Court of Appeals
    • April 1, 2002
    ...and (5) the substantive statutes alleged to have been violated. Id. This test was adopted by this Court in [State v.] Dasher, [278 S.C. 454, 298 S.E.2d 215 (1982)]. Id. at 319-20, 428 S.E.2d at It is axiomatic that a conspiracy may be proved by direct or circumstantial evidence or by circum......
  • 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