Bennett v. State

669 S.E.2d 594, 380 S.C. 215, 2008 S.C. LEXIS 333
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedNovember 24, 2008
Docket26565
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 669 S.E.2d 594 (Bennett v. State) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of South Carolina primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Bennett v. State, 669 S.E.2d 594, 380 S.C. 215, 2008 S.C. LEXIS 333 (S.C. 2008).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This matter is before the Court pursuant to the State’s petition to hear it in our original jurisdiction and for expedited consideration. Because the State’s petition presents an issue of public interest, we exercise our authority to review this matter in our original jurisdiction. S.C. Const, art. V, § 5; Rule 229, SCACR; Key v. Currie, 305 S.C. 115, 116, 406 S.E.2d 356, 357 (1991). We dispense with further briefing and answer the question presented.

Earl Bennett and other inmates filed separate habeas corpus petitions in the circuit court, alleging their continued incarceration for violations of the Community Supervision Program (CSP) 1 is unconstitutional. Pursuant to this Court’s decision in State v. McGrier, 378 S.C. 320, 663 S.E.2d 15 (2008), the inmates claim they are entitled to immediate release from incarceration because they have fully served their original sentences. In response, the State has filed individual returns to the habeas petitions in the circuit court, *217 arguing the holding in McGrier should not be given retroactive application.

In our view, McGrier’s retroactivity is patently clear; however, we take this opportunity to remove any doubts. We now hold that our decision in McGrier is to be applied retroactively. See Pinckney v. Warren, 344 S.C. 382, 391, 544 S.E.2d 620, 625 (2001) (recognizing that retroactivity may be extended when justice requires and innocent persons will be adversely affected).

TOAL, C.J., WALLER, PLEICONES, BEATTY and KITTREDGE, JJ., concur.
1

. S.C.Code Ann. § 24-21-560 (2007) (providing that inmates who meet statutory prerequisites may be released to community supervision program operated by the Department of Probation, Parole, and Pardon Services).

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

State v. Skelton
Supreme Court of South Carolina, 2010

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
669 S.E.2d 594, 380 S.C. 215, 2008 S.C. LEXIS 333, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bennett-v-state-sc-2008.