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

State v. Ritch

354 S.E.2d 909, 292 S.C. 75, 1987 S.C. LEXIS 245
Supreme Court of South Carolina·Decided April 13, 1987·No. 22706·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

Appellant contends that the trial judge erred in proceeding with his trial in absentia. We agree.

The trial judge failed to find that appellant had received notice of his right to be present at trial and a warning that he would be tried in his absence should he fail to attend, as required by Criminal Practice Rule 3. This was an error. State v. Jackson, 288 S. C. 94, 341 S. E. (2d) 375 (1986); State v. Fleming, 287 S. C. 268, 335 S. E. (2d) 814 (Ct. App. 1985). Accordingly, we reverse and remand for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Chandler, J., not participating.

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

State v. Ritch, 354 S.E.2d 909, 292 S.C. 75, 1987 S.C. LEXIS 245 (S.C. 1987).

354 S.E.2d 909 (State v. Ritch) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Wrapp
808 S.E.2d 821 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2017)
City of Aiken v. David Michael Koontz
629 S.E.2d 686 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2006)
State v. Patterson
625 S.E.2d 239 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2006)
State v. Truesdale
548 S.E.2d 896 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2001)
State v. Castineira
535 S.E.2d 449 (Court of Appeals of South Carolina, 2000)
State v. Hudson
574 A.2d 434 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1990)
State v. Williams
355 S.E.2d 861 (Supreme Court of South Carolina, 1987)