Harold Jones, Jr. v. State ( 2023 )


Menu:
  • 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 Court of Appeals
    Harold Jones, Jr., Petitioner,
    v.
    State of South Carolina, Respondent.
    Appellate Case No. 2019-000396
    Appeal From Charleston County
    G. Thomas Cooper, Jr., Circuit Court Judge
    Unpublished Opinion No. 2023-UP-362
    Submitted October 1, 2023 – Filed November 8, 2023
    AFFIRMED
    Chief Appellate Defender Robert Michael Dudek, of
    Columbia, for Petitioner.
    Assistant Attorney General Danielle Dixon, of Columbia,
    for Respondent.
    PER CURIAM: This Court granted certiorari to review the post-conviction relief
    (PCR) court's finding that Petitioner Harold Jones failed to prove plea counsel was
    ineffective for failing to advise him of a plea offer. We affirm.
    Petitioner was charged with murder and possession of a weapon during the
    commission of a violent crime. Plea counsel negotiated a plea offer with the State
    in which Petitioner would plead guilty as indicted to the weapon charge and to the
    lesser-included offense of voluntary manslaughter in exchange for a negotiated
    sentence of twenty-two and a half years' imprisonment. However, immediately
    before the scheduled plea hearing, Petitioner's family members informed counsel
    that they believed he was incompetent and unable to knowingly and voluntarily
    plead guilty. As a result, counsel informed the State that Petitioner could not plead
    guilty until the latter's competency was officially determined. The State withdrew
    the twenty-two-and-a-half-year offer at that time.
    The following Tuesday, the State communicated a twenty-three-year plea offer to
    counsel, but conditioned the offer on Petitioner pleading within a week and
    providing it documentation certifying his competency before the plea. Counsel
    informed the State the earliest competency evaluation he was able to obtain was
    scheduled for several weeks after the expiration of the offer. Based upon this
    information, the State withdrew the offer and counsel did not inform Petitioner of
    it. Months later and after Petitioner was deemed competent, he pled guilty in
    exchange for a negotiated sentence of thirty-five years' imprisonment.
    We find probative evidence supports the PCR court's finding that Petitioner was
    not prejudiced by counsel's failure to communicate the twenty-three-year offer.
    See Collins v. State, 
    422 S.C. 250
    , 262, 
    810 S.E.2d 871
    , 877 (2018) (explaining
    that a PCR applicant alleging counsel was ineffective in handling a plea offer must
    prove prejudice by "demonstrat[ing] a reasonable probability that: (1) he 'would
    have accepted the earlier plea offer had [he] been afforded effective assistance of
    counsel;' (2) 'the plea would have been entered without the prosecution canceling it
    or the trial court refusing to accept it;' and (3) 'the end result of the criminal process
    would have been more favorable by reason of a plea to a lesser charge or a
    sentence of less prison time'" (quoting Missouri v. Frye, 
    566 U.S. 134
    , 147
    (2012))). Undisputed evidence showed the twenty-three-year plea offer was
    conditioned on Petitioner pleading and providing documentation proving he was
    competent within a week of the offer. Petitioner could not have pled during that
    week-long period because the earliest competency evaluation plea counsel could
    procure for him was scheduled for several weeks after the plea offer expired.
    Further, even if the parties agreed to allow Petitioner to plead guilty at the time, the
    plea court would not have accepted the guilty plea without a competency
    evaluation establishing Petitioner was competent. See id.; see also Garren v. State,
    
    423 S.C. 1
    , 14, 
    813 S.E.2d 704
    , 711 (2018) ("Before a defendant may plead guilty,
    it must be established that the defendant is competent and that the defendant's
    decision to plead guilty is a knowing and voluntary one.").
    AFFIRMED. 1
    WILLIAMS, C.J., and HEWITT and VERDIN, JJ., concur.
    1
    We decide this case without oral argument pursuant to Rule 215, SCACR.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 2023-UP-362

Filed Date: 11/8/2023

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 10/22/2024