Stepney v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina

Stepney v. State

292 S.E.2d 41, 278 S.C. 47, 1982 S.C. LEXIS 337

CourtSupreme Court of South Carolina

DecidedMay 24, 1982

Docket21708

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 292 S.E.2d 41 (Stepney 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

Stepney v. State, 292 S.E.2d 41, 278 S.C. 47, 1982 S.C. LEXIS 337 (S.C. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The respondent was convicted of receiving stolen goods and given a five-year prison sentence suspended upon two years’ probation. While on probation, he pleaded guilty to temporary use of a vehicle without permission and was sentenced to nine months. Because of the offense, an arrest warrant was issued charging him with a probation violation. His probationary sentence was revoked after a hearing.

The respondent then applied for post-conviction relief, alleging his revocation hearing violated due process requirements. The judge granted relief and ordered a new hearing. The State appeals.

Errors in the probation revocation hearing should have been raised by the probationer on direct appeal. State v. Shumate, 276 S. C. 46, 275 S. E. (2d) 288 (1981). Alleged errors which may be reviewed on direct appeal may not be asserted for the first time in post-conviction proceedings. Cummings v. State, 274 S. C. 26, 260 S. E. (2d) 187 (1979).

We conclude the matter was not properly before the post conviction hearing judge. Therefore we reverse the grant of post-conviction relief and reinstate the sentence.

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