From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Robinson v. State

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
Jun 24, 2015
Appellate Case No. 2011-198349 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 24, 2015)

Opinion

Appellate Case No. 2011-198349 Unpublished Opinion No. 2015-UP-299

06-24-2015

Troy Robinson, Respondent, v. State of South Carolina, Petitioner.

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Senior Assistant Attorney General David A. Spencer, all of Columbia, for Petitioner. Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak and Appellate Defender Benjamin John Tripp, both of Columbia, for Respondent.


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.

ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI

Appeal From Bamberg County
Doyet A. Early, III, Plea Judge James R. Barber, III, Post-Conviction Relief Judge

REVERSED

Attorney General Alan McCrory Wilson, Chief Deputy Attorney General John W. McIntosh, Senior Assistant Deputy Attorney General Salley W. Elliott, and Senior Assistant Attorney General David A. Spencer, all of Columbia, for Petitioner.

Appellate Defender Robert M. Pachak and Appellate Defender Benjamin John Tripp, both of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM : The State appeals the order of the circuit court granting Troy Robinson post-conviction relief (PCR). We find the circuit court erred in holding Robinson was prejudiced by plea counsel's allegedly deficient performance. See Terry v. State, 383 S.C. 361, 370, 680 S.E.2d 277, 282 (2009) (providing a PCR applicant has the burden of establishing he is entitled to relief); Stalk v. State, 383 S.C. 559, 562, 681 S.E.2d 592, 594 (2009) ("'[The prejudice requirement] focuses on whether counsel's constitutionally ineffective performance affected the outcome of the plea process. In other words, in order to satisfy the prejudice requirement, the defendant must show that there is a reasonable probability that, but for counsel's errors, he would not have pleaded guilty and would have insisted on going to trial.'" (quoting Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 (1985)) (internal quotation marks omitted)).

REVERSED.

THOMAS, KONDUROS, and GEATHERS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Robinson v. State

STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals
Jun 24, 2015
Appellate Case No. 2011-198349 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 24, 2015)
Case details for

Robinson v. State

Case Details

Full title:Troy Robinson, Respondent, v. State of South Carolina, Petitioner.

Court:STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Date published: Jun 24, 2015

Citations

Appellate Case No. 2011-198349 (S.C. Ct. App. Jun. 24, 2015)