State v. White
| Decision Date | 11 April 2005 |
| Docket Number | No. 3973.,3973. |
| Citation | 611 S.E.2d 927,364 S.C. 143 |
| Parties | The STATE, Respondent, v. Brandi Michelle WHITE, (aka: Brandi Michelle Wade), Appellant. |
| Court | South Carolina Supreme Court |
Assistant Appellate Defender Aileen P. Clare, of Columbia, for Appellant.
Attorney General Henry D. McMaster, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Assistant Attorney General David A. Spencer, all of Columbia; and Solicitor Thomas E. Pope, of York, for Respondent.
Appellant, Brandi M. White a/k/a Brandi Michelle Wade, pled guilty to six counts of threatening a public official. The trial judge sentenced White to six five-year terms, three of them to run consecutively and three of them to run concurrently. White appeals, asserting error in the trial judge's failure to order a medical examination to determine her competency. We affirm.1
White was indicted after she wrote a series of threatening letters to a probation officer and a detention center officer. On March 5, 2004, White appeared before the circuit court and pled guilty on six indictments charging her with threatening a public official. During the plea hearing, the trial court asked White if she had been treated for any mental or emotional disability, and White indicated that she had been treated for mental problems. White's attorney then explained White had been admitted to a psychiatric institution at least six times and that she had "a myriad of diagnoses which Dr. Morgan [would] elaborate on over the history of her life." Counsel further indicated White had a history of bipolar disorder, depression, and post-traumatic stress disorder, and that she was currently taking the medication "Tegretol." The court noted White had not been sent for an evaluation so they were not holding a Blair2 hearing, but questioned whether the Tegretol would prevent White from being able to understand what they were doing at the plea hearing. The following colloquy then occurred:
After the solicitor placed the factual basis for White's plea on the record, White's attorney argued in mitigation that White was born with a condition that caused a shunt to be placed in her head and the shunt was "still there today." He again noted for the court that White had a history of mental health problems. Counsel then presented Dr. Morgan, who had examined White and was given White's mental health and neurological records.
Dr. Morgan stated that White was born with water on the brain and that she had a shunt put in at several months of age to shunt the water from the brain. She was followed by a neurosurgeon until July 1998, at which time it was discovered that part of the apparatus was embedded in the brain, but that it seemed to be working okay and "they decided not to do anything to it at that time." White failed to follow up with the neurosurgeon and Dr. Morgan was concerned because of the fact that White had begun to complain of headaches, which could be an indication of pressure building in the brain. He stated, "So I think there is some physical basis that may account for some of the behavior that we're observing here although it has not really been worked out very carefully." Dr. Morgan also noted White had been in the Department of Mental Health on six different occasions and had been diagnosed with depression, bipolar disorder, alcohol and drug problems and post traumatic stress disorder. He then concluded as follows:
In a situation like this you naturally wonder about the question you raised guilty by mentally ill, whether she can control her behavior, that maybe she couldn't and that sounds like what I am saying, but if you look at the behavior here and the letters and the context in which she explains those, there is a deliberateness about them, a sort of calculated plan here, because she's basically happy where she is. Sadly she says it is the best home I've ever had, and so I think a lot of this is to perpetuate a situation she finds herself more comfortable in than she's ever had before from her observations.... So I don't think she fits the guilty but mentally ill even though in another circumstance I think that might be a logical assumption.
Thereafter, White's attorney informed the court that he had represented White on a previous charge of threatening a public official for which she was currently incarcerated, and at that time he sent her for a mental health evaluation.
White appeals asserting the trial court abused its discretion by failing to order a medical examination to determine her competency to stand trial because she had a documented history of congenital brain damage and severe mental illness. She argues, based on Dr. Morgan's statements that the embedded shunt possibly accounted for some of her behavior and that she had received inpatient psychiatric care on at least six occasions, the court's failure to order a mental examination for her was an abuse of discretion. We disagree.
South Carolina Code Ann § 44-23-410 (2002) provides in pertinent part:
Whenever a judge of the Circuit Court or Family Court has reason to believe that a person on trial before him, charged with the commission of a criminal offense or civil contempt, is not fit to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Colden
...to believe' a defendant lacks a certain mental capacity necessarily requires the exercise of discretion." State v. White, 364 S.C. 143, 147-48, 611 S.E.2d 927, 929 (Ct.App.2005) (citing and quoting State v. Bradshaw, 269 S.C. 642, 644, 239 S.E.2d 652, 653 (1977)). An abuse of discretion occ......
-
State v. Kester
... ... competency evaluation after being informed Kester had been ... found competent to stand trial in a prior evaluation and ... after observing Kester in a lengthy colloquy regarding his ... decision to represent himself. See State v. White, ... 364 S.C. 143, 147, 611 S.E.2d 927, 929 (Ct. App. 2005) ... ("[T]he decision of whether to order a competency ... examination is within the discretion of the trial judge, ... whose decision will not be overturned absent a clear showing ... of abuse of ... ...
-
State v. Kester
...evaluation and after observing Kester in a lengthy colloquy regarding his decision to represent himself. See State v. White, 364 S.C. 143, 147, 611 S.E.2d 927, 929 (Ct. App. 2005) ("[T]he decision of whether to order a competency examination is within the discretion of the trial judge, whos......
-
Duncan v. State
...in evaluating the facts presented on the question of competency." (quoting State v. Drayton, 270 S.C. 582, 584, 243 S.E.2d 458, 459 (1978))); id. ("Thus, despite the mandatory language contained § 44-23-410, the decision of whether to order a competency examination is within the discretion ......