Blandshaw v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Blandshaw v. State

152 S.E.2d 349, 249 S.C. 42, 1967 S.C. LEXIS 222

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedJanuary 9, 1967

Docket18592

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 152 S.E.2d 349 (Blandshaw 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

Blandshaw v. State, 152 S.E.2d 349, 249 S.C. 42, 1967 S.C. LEXIS 222 (S.C. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

Brailsford, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court dismissing a writ of habeas corpus and remanding the prisoner, Bisand Blandshaw, to' custody of the South Carolina Penetentiary, where he is presently serving a sentence of twelve years. This sentence was imposed upon Blandshaw in Dar.lington County in 1963 upon his trial on an indictment for murder and his conviction of manslaughter.

After a full hearing, the circuit court found no merit in any of the grounds for habeas corpus relied upon in the petition, which were (1) that petitioner was denied a preliminary hearing; (2) that petitioner was tried and sentenced under the wrong name; (3) that the solicitor’s conduct of the trial was deliberately prejudicial toward the defendant; (4) that 'the court failed to allow the petitioner’s witnesses [45]*45to testify; ( 5 ) that petitioner was not adequately represented by counsel.

We agree with the circuit court that the record does not sustain any of the charges leveled by petitioner at the court, the solicitor or his retained trial counsel. We find it unnecessary to state our reasons for these conclusions because the petitioner stated in the circuit court, and asserts here, that he does not seek a new trial and prefers to serve his present sentence than to be awarded this relief. Even if all of the allegations of the petition should be assumed to be true, petitioner would not be entitled to an absolute release.

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

Brailsford, Justice.

This is an appeal from an order of the circuit court dismissing a writ of habeas corpus and remanding the prisoner, Bisand Blandshaw, to' custody of the South Carolina Penetentiary, where he is presently serving a sentence of twelve years. This sentence was imposed upon Blandshaw in Dar.lington County in 1963 upon his trial on an indictment for murder and his conviction of manslaughter.

After a full hearing, the circuit court found no merit in any of the grounds for habeas corpus relied upon in the petition, which were (1) that petitioner was denied a preliminary hearing; (2) that petitioner was tried and sentenced under the wrong name; (3) that the solicitor’s conduct of the trial was deliberately prejudicial toward the defendant; (4) that 'the court failed to allow the petitioner’s witnesses [45]*45to testify; ( 5 ) that petitioner was not adequately represented by counsel.

We agree with the circuit court that the record does not sustain any of the charges leveled by petitioner at the court, the solicitor or his retained trial counsel. We find it unnecessary to state our reasons for these conclusions because the petitioner stated in the circuit court, and asserts here, that he does not seek a new trial and prefers to serve his present sentence than to be awarded this relief. Even if all of the allegations of the petition should be assumed to be true, petitioner would not be entitled to an absolute release.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

152 S.E.2d 349, 249 S.C. 42, 1967 S.C. LEXIS 222, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/blandshaw-v-state-sc-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack