State v. McCoy, 22271
| Decision Date | 01 April 1985 |
| Docket Number | No. 22271,22271 |
| Citation | 328 S.E.2d 620,285 S.C. 115 |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
| Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. James Kevin McCOY, Appellant. |
South Carolina Office of Appellate Defense, Columbia; and Jerry L. Taylor and Stephen John Henry, Greenville, for appellant.
Atty. Gen. T. Travis Medlock, Asst. Atty. Gen. Harold M. Coombs, Jr., and Staff Atty. Carlisle Roberts, Jr., Columbia; and Sol. William B. Traxler, Jr., Greenville, for respondent.
Appellant, James Kevin McCoy, was indicted for participating with a friend in the murder of the friend's father. He was fifteen years old when arrested. The family court waived jurisdiction after a hearing, and appellant's case was transferred to the Court of General Sessions where he was tried for murder. Appellant was convicted and sentenced to life imprisonment.
Appellant contends the transfer hearing in the family court was tainted because the solicitor's office failed to reveal allegedly exculpatory evidence pursuant to a Brady request. Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), stands for the proposition that an accused is denied due process at trial if, after making a timely request, he does not receive any exculpatory information the prosecution may hold.
A transfer hearing is not a trial. When considering whether to waive jurisdiction over a juvenile accused of murder, the family court judge uses the public interest as his criterion. Family Court Rule 41. A preliminary determination of guilt would be inappropriate at such a hearing. Since the information appellant sought was provided well before his trial, his reliance on Brady v. Maryland is inappropriate.
Appellant's other exceptions are without merit.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hill
...326 S.C. 220, 487 S.E.2d 590 (1997). The application of these two rules is not, however, without limitation. See State v. McCoy, 285 S.C. 115, 116, 328 S.E.2d 620, 621 (1985) (declining to apply Brady in the context of a family court transfer hearing given the hearing was not a trial and wa......
-
State v. Caulder
...we perceive no prejudice from the actions of the court since the test results were furnished Caulder prior to trial. State v. McCoy, 285 S.C. 115, 328 S.E.2d 620, 621 (1985). II. Caulder next assigns error to the failure of the trial judge to permit him to cross-examine the State's forensic......
- State v. Fuller, 22979