Smalls v. South Carolina

by
Petitioner Stephen Smalls was convicted by jury of armed robbery for the 2007 robbery of a Bojangles restaurant in Columbus. The trial court sentenced him to twenty-five years in prison. Smalls filed an application for PCR alleging he received ineffective assistance of counsel. The PCR court first held a hearing in 2007. The court held the record open to allow PCR counsel time to investigate the circumstances under which the State dismissed a carjacking charge against Smalls’ accomplice on the morning of Smalls' trial. The hearing was not reconvened until 2012. The PCR court described the issue regarding the carjacking charge as not only one of ineffective assistance of counsel, but also whether "the State was deceptive" in representations made to the trial court and trial counsel. The PCR court ultimately denied relief. The South Carolina Supreme Court transferred Smalls' petition for a writ of certiorari to the court of appeals pursuant to Rule 243(l) of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules, and the court of appeals granted the petition. The court of appeals then found trial counsel's performance was deficient regarding the carjacking charge and in two other instances. However, the court of appeals found "there was no prejudice resulting from trial counsel's deficient performance because the State presented overwhelming evidence of [Smalls'] guilt." The Supreme Court, in reviewing the appellate court’s judgment, agreed with the finding that trial counsel was deficient, but disagreed that the State presented overwhelming evidence of guilt that precluded a finding of prejudice under the second prong of Strickland v. Washington. The Supreme Court found the evidence was not overwhelming, and reversed the court of appeals' finding that counsel's errors resulted in no prejudice. View "Smalls v. South Carolina" on Justia Law