From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Green v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 27, 2003
576 S.E.2d 182 (S.C. 2003)

Summary

stating that § 17-27-45 does not provide for tolling the statute of limitations where an applicant seeks federal habeas relief prior to exhausting his state remedies."

Summary of this case from Pettinato v. Eagleton

Opinion

Opinion No. 25588.

Submitted January 14, 2003.

Filed January 27, 2003.

Appeal From Bamberg County, Luke N. Brown, Jr., Trial Judge, Rodney A. Peeples, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

AFFIRMED

Deputy Chief Attorney Joseph L. Savitz, III, of S.C. Office of Appellate Defense, of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Attorney General Charles M. Condon, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Assistant Deputy Attorney General Allen Bullard, and Senior Assistant Attorney General Ken Woodington, all of Columbia, for Respondent.


ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI


Petitioner pled guilty to voluntary manslaughter on March 19, 1997, and was sentenced on March 20, 1997, to thirty years imprisonment. His plea and sentence were affirmed. State v. Green, Op. No. 99-MO-025 (S.C.Sup.Ct. filed March 10, 1999), and the remittitur was sent on April 1, 1999.

Petitioner filed an application for post-conviction relief (PCR) on November 20, 2000. After a hearing, where petitioner was represented by counsel, the PCR judge granted the State's motion to dismiss on the ground the application was barred by the statute of limitations. Petitioner now seeks review of that order. We grant the petition for a writ of certiorari, dispense with further briefing and affirm the PCR judge's order.

Petitioner contends that his application was improperly dismissed because he had been pursuing federal habeas corpus relief prior to filing his application. Petitioner contends that the time for filing the application should have been tolled during the pendency of the federal proceedings. We disagree.

South Carolina Code Ann. § 17-27-45(a) (Supp. 2001) states that an application for PCR must be filed within one year of the sending of the remittitur. The statute does not provide any exception for tolling the statute of limitations where an applicant seeks federal habeas relief prior to exhausting his state remedies. Accordingly, the PCR judge properly dismissed the application on the ground the statute of limitations had run.

AFFIRMED.

TOAL, C.J., MOORE, WALLER, BURNETT and PLEICONES, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Green v. State

Supreme Court of South Carolina
Jan 27, 2003
576 S.E.2d 182 (S.C. 2003)

stating that § 17-27-45 does not provide for tolling the statute of limitations where an applicant seeks federal habeas relief prior to exhausting his state remedies."

Summary of this case from Pettinato v. Eagleton
Case details for

Green v. State

Case Details

Full title:Malcolm Lonnie Green, Petitioner, State of South Carolina, Respondent

Court:Supreme Court of South Carolina

Date published: Jan 27, 2003

Citations

576 S.E.2d 182 (S.C. 2003)
576 S.E.2d 182

Citing Cases

Williams v. Cartledge

Duncan v. Walker, 533 U.S. 167, 181-82 (2001). Also, the filing of a federal habeas petition does not toll…

Pettinato v. Eagleton

Here, the Magistrate Judge, without a great deal of explanation, concluded that this second PCR application…