State v. Osborne

Court of Appeals of South Carolina

State v. Osborne

DecidedJuly 15, 2015

Docket2015-UP-358

StatusUnpublished

This text of State v. Osborne (State v. Osborne) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals 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. Osborne, (S.C. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

Opinion

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

State of South Carolina, Petitioner,

v.

Thomas Osborne, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2012-208631

Appeal From Spartanburg County Roger L. Couch, Plea Judge J. Mark Hayes, II, PCR Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-358 Submitted May 1, 2015 – Filed July 15, 2015

AFFIRMED

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Suzanne Hollifield White, both of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Caprood v. State, 338 S.C. 103, 109, 525 S.E.2d 514, 517 (2000) ("This [c]ourt gives great deference to the PCR court's findings of fact and conclusions of law."); id. at 109-10, 525 S.E.2d at 517 ("The existence in the record of 'any evidence' of probative value is sufficient to uphold the PCR [court]'s ruling."); Simuel v. State, 390 S.C. 267, 270, 701 S.E.2d 738, 739 (2010) ("This [c]ourt gives great deference to a PCR [court]'s findings where matters of credibility are involved."); Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399, 1409-10 (2012) (reasoning that in the context of a guilty plea, a finding of prejudice is not ultimately dependent upon whether the defendant would have proceeded to trial, but whether the result of the plea proceedings would have been different); State v. Curry, 410 S.C. 46, 54, 762 S.E.2d 721, 725 (Ct. App. 2014) ("Although a defendant's sentence is the same regardless of whether he is merely guilty or guilty but mentally ill, a defendant found guilty but mentally ill is entitled to immediate treatment and evaluation." (internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT, LOCKEMY, and McDONALD, JJ., concur.

1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

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

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

State of South Carolina, Petitioner,

v.

Thomas Osborne, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2012-208631

Appeal From Spartanburg County Roger L. Couch, Plea Judge J. Mark Hayes, II, PCR Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-358 Submitted May 1, 2015 – Filed July 15, 2015

AFFIRMED

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson and Assistant Deputy Attorney General Suzanne Hollifield White, both of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Deputy Chief Appellate Defender Wanda H. Carter, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: Affirmed pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Caprood v. State, 338 S.C. 103, 109, 525 S.E.2d 514, 517 (2000) ("This [c]ourt gives great deference to the PCR court's findings of fact and conclusions of law."); id. at 109-10, 525 S.E.2d at 517 ("The existence in the record of 'any evidence' of probative value is sufficient to uphold the PCR [court]'s ruling."); Simuel v. State, 390 S.C. 267, 270, 701 S.E.2d 738, 739 (2010) ("This [c]ourt gives great deference to a PCR [court]'s findings where matters of credibility are involved."); Missouri v. Frye, 132 S. Ct. 1399, 1409-10 (2012) (reasoning that in the context of a guilty plea, a finding of prejudice is not ultimately dependent upon whether the defendant would have proceeded to trial, but whether the result of the plea proceedings would have been different); State v. Curry, 410 S.C. 46, 54, 762 S.E.2d 721, 725 (Ct. App. 2014) ("Although a defendant's sentence is the same regardless of whether he is merely guilty or guilty but mentally ill, a defendant found guilty but mentally ill is entitled to immediate treatment and evaluation." (internal quotation marks omitted)).

AFFIRMED.1

SHORT, LOCKEMY, and McDONALD, JJ., concur.

1 We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

State v. Osborne, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-v-osborne-scctapp-2015.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack