Home/Supreme Court of South Carolina/State v. Hunter

State v. Hunter

386 S.E.2d 460, 300 S.C. 83, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 232
CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina
DecidedDecember 4, 1989
Docket23106
StatusPublished

This text of 386 S.E.2d 460 (State v. Hunter) 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
State v. Hunter, 386 S.E.2d 460, 300 S.C. 83, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 232 (S.C. 1989).

Opinion

Chandler, Justice:

[84]*84Appellant Roy F. Hunter (Hunter) contends the State failed to produce certain evidence required by Brady v. Maryland.1 We agree.

Prior to the call of the case, Hunter filed a Brady motion. During trial, it was revealed that the State had not disclosed all information to which he was entitled. The State’s failure to comply with Brady mandates reversal and a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Gregory, C. J., and Harwell, Finney and Toal, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Brady v. Maryland
373 U.S. 83 (Supreme Court, 1963)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
386 S.E.2d 460, 300 S.C. 83, 1989 S.C. LEXIS 232, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-hunter-sc-1989.