Wright v. State ( 2017 )

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.
THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Supreme Court
Lloyd Wright, Petitioner,
v.
State of South Carolina, Respondent.
Appellate Case No. 2014-001380
ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI
Appeal from Charleston County
R. Markley Dennis, Jr., Post-Conviction Relief Judge
Memorandum Opinion No. 2017-MO-001
Submitted November 15, 2016 – Filed January 5, 2017
REVERSED AND REMANDED
Appellate Defender John H. Strom, of Columbia, for
Petitioner.
Attorney General Alan Wilson and Assistant Attorney
General Ruston W. Neely, both of Columbia, for
Respondent.
PER CURIAM: We granted a writ of certiorari to review the denial of Petitioner
Lloyd Wright's application for post-conviction relief (PCR). After careful review
of the appendix, briefs, and applicable law, we find no evidence of probative value
to support the PCR court's finding that when Petitioner rejected the State's plea
offer, he was aware that a conviction would result in a mandatory sentence of life
without parole. See, e.g., Suber v. State, 371 S.C. 554, 560, 640 S.E.2d 884, 887
(2007) (reversing the PCR court's decision because there was no evidence of
probative value to support it); see also Libretti v. United States, 516 U.S. 29, 50
(1995) ("[I]t is the responsibility of defense counsel to inform a defendant of the
advantages and disadvantages of a plea agreement . . . ."); Roscoe v. State, 345 S.C.
16, 20 n.6, 546 S.E.2d 417, 419 n.6 (2001) ("[W]e have consistently held a
defendant must have a full understanding of the consequences of his plea and of
the charges against him . . . ." (citations omitted)). Accordingly, pursuant to Rule
220(b), SCACR, and the above-mentioned authorities, we reverse the denial of
PCR and remand.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
BEATTY, C.J., KITTREDGE, HEARN, FEW, JJ., and Acting Justice Costa
M. Pleicones, concur.