State v. Hallock

269 S.E.2d 774, 275 S.C. 314, 1980 S.C. LEXIS 442
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided September 15, 1980·No. 21302·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Cttriam:

Appellant was indicted on charges of assault with intent to kill (two counts) and carrying a pistol (one count). Upon commencement of the second day of trial appellant sought permission to proceed pro se, retaining appointed counsel in *315 an advisory capacity. Stating only that appellant must abide by the rules, the presiding judge granted the request. The jury subsequently found appellant guilty of all charges and consecutive sentences of twenty (20) years on each assault with intent to kill charge and one (1) year on the weapons charge imposed.

The records presently before this Court indicate that the presiding judge failed to properly determine whether appellant’s request to proceed pro se constituted a knowing and intelligent waiver of the right to counsel. See State v. Dixon, 269 S. C. 107, 109, 236 S. E. (2d) 419, 420 (1977) citing Johnson v. Zerbst, 304 U. S. 458, 58 S. Ct. 1019, 82 L. Ed. 1461 (1938). Accordingly, pursuant to the procedure employed in Dixon, supra, this case is remanded to the lower court for determination of whether the waiver was intelligently made.

Remanded.

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

State v. Hallock, 269 S.E.2d 774, 275 S.C. 314, 1980 S.C. LEXIS 442 (S.C. 1980).

269 S.E.2d 774 (State v. Hallock) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Cash
403 S.E.2d 632 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1991)
State v. Hallock
288 S.E.2d 398 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1982)
State v. Loftin
275 S.E.2d 575 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1981)